_»*••••••••»•( 


UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


SCHOOL  OF  LAW 
LIBRARY 


NOMINATING  SYSTEMS: 

DIRECT  PRIMARIES 

VERSUS  CONVENTIONS 

IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


BY 

ERNST  CHRISTOPHER  MEYER 

1    •    V 


Madison,  Wis. 

PUBLISHED  BY  THE  AUTHOR 

1902 


I 

13  01 


Copyright,  1903 

BY 

ERNST  C.  MEYER 


STATE  JOURNAL  PRINTING  COMPANY, 

Pkintkrs  and  Stereotypers, 

madison,  wis. 


PREFACE. 


TKe  general  Interest  which  has  of  late  IJeen  manifested 
in  primary  reform,  and  the  almost  phenomenal  spread 
of  agitation  in  behalf  of  the  nomination  of  candidates 
by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people,  has  led  the  author  to  pre- 
sent the  results  of  his  investigation  to  the  public  in  the 
hope  that  it  may  contribute  some  share  to  the  solution  of 
the  problem  of  nomination  to  public  office,  by  arousing 
still  further  interest  in  the  subject,  and  by  opening  up 
to  the  student  of  this  question  a  fruitful  field  of  ex- 
perience which  has  remained  largely  unexplored  hereto- 
fore. 

The  decline  of  our  nominating  Institutions  has  been 
continuous  ever  since  their  origin.  Their  history  of  in- 
creasing corruption  has  been  duplicated  by  our  other 
political  institutions,  and,  like  them,  they  are  gradually 
being  forced  into  subjection  to  the  law.  Conceived  in 
freedom,  reared  in  license,  matured  in  law,  will  be  the 
complete  story  of  their  evolution.  The  last  stage  is  still 
in  its  inception.  It  is  difficult,  uncertain,  unsolved,  and 
is  the  subject  of  the  present  study. 

The  primary,  about  which  the  discussion  centers,  is  of 
fundamental  importance.  It  is  the  citizen's  citadel  of 
right.  It  is  the  source  of  power  in  government.  In 
purity,  it  is  the  fount  from  which  the  great  blessings  of 
democratic  government  flow.  In  corruption,  it  is  to-day 
proving  itself  the  curse  of  representative  institutions. 


iv  Preface. 

For  this  reason  it  well  merits  close  attention  and  serious 
thought. 

The  task  of  its  purification  is  a  hard  one.  Legislators 
have  been  toiling  over  it  long.  Many  remedies  have  been 
tried,  many  more  have  been  proposed,  much  progress  has 
been  made,  but  the  problem  has  not  yet  been  completely 
solved.  In  dealing  with  one  of  these  proposed  reme- 
dies— the  direct  primary — it  is  the  aim  of  the  writer  to 
point  out  its  advantages  and  disadvantages,  as  seen  by 
an  unimpassioned  student  of  the  facts  of  experience,  and 
to  suggest  some  possible  improvements  in  our  direct  pri- 
maiy  legislation  which  ultimately  may  lead  to  success. 

The  collection  of  the  facts  upon  which  this  study  is 
based  proved  a  laborious  undertaking,  because  of  the 
utter  lack  of  organized  material.  Printed  matter  fre- 
quently proved  valueless  because  of  carelessness  and  in- 
accuracy in  its  compilation.  The  widely  scattered 
sources  of  experience  left  reliable  information  in  many 
cases  meager  in  quantity  or  even  inaccessible.  Fierce 
opposition  to  the  reform^  as  well  as  over-enthusiasm  in 
its  behalf,  has  led  to  conflicting  statements  respecting  the 
workings  of  particular  systems,  which  at  times  were  so 
inconsistent  as  to  be  almost  hopelessly  confusing.  But 
withal  the  investigation  has  been  interesting  and  en- 
couraging. 

It  has  been  the  constant  aim  of  the  author  to  preserve 
an  unprejudiced  and  non-partisan  attitude  of  mind,  and 
to  view  the  facts  as  they  came  to  his  knowledge  in  the 
light  of  one  who  seeks  only  after  truth,  and  who  endeav- 
ors to  present  faithfully  that  which  he  finds. 

The  writer  is  aware  of  the  fact  that  inaccuracies  may 
have  crept  into  his  work  in  spite  of  painstaking  efforts 


Preface.  :V 

to  avoid  tHem.  The  uncertainties  of  researcli  In  a  new 
field  are  many.  The  pioneer  plow,  as  it  jumps  along, 
inevitably  turns  a  crude  furrow.  For  this  reason  he 
invites  all  readers  to  call  his  attention  to  any  errors  that 
may  be  discovered,  with  the  assurance  of  grateful  ac- 
knowledgment. 

In  the  presentation  of  his  subject  the  ambition  of  the 
author  has  been  to  furnish  material  for  thought  and 
study,  not  only  to  the  ordinary  citizen,  who  possesses  but 
a  general  interest  in  primary  elections,  but  also  to  en- 
able the  scientific  student  and  the  practical  legislator  to 
peruse  the  treal  ise  with  profit. 

In  Part  I  of  this  volume  the  evolution  of  the  caucus 
and  convention  system  is  traced  from  its  origin  to  the 
modem  stage  of  corruption  and  decline,  because  it  proves 
the  existence  of  a  cause  for  action  on  the  part  of  the  re- 
formers of  our  nominating  machinery,  and  justifies  an 
elaborate  exposition  of  direct  nominations  as  a  proposed 
remedy. 

Part  II,  which  deals  with  direct  primary  legislation  in 
the  United  States,  is  intended  to  open  up  sources  of 
study  for  the  practical  legislator  who  seeks  primary  re- 
form. It  aims  to  give  a  sufficient  review  of  the  existing 
direct  primary  laws  to  guide  in  the  determination  of  the 
essential  features  of  a  good  law ;  to  indicate  the  imper- 
fection of  the  legislation  in  which  the  principle  of  direct 
nominations  has^  up  to  the  present  time,  in  most  cases, 
been  incorporated;  and  to  mark  out  the  exact  field  of 
experience  in  which  the  direct  vote  system  has  been  in 
practical  operation. 

Part  III  grows  out  of,  and  is  based  upon,  Part  II,  and 
concerns  itself  with  an  exposition  of  the  advantages  and 


vi  Preface, 

disadvantages  of  the  direct  vote  principle  as  demon- 
strated bj  a  wide  and  varied  experience.  Specific  facts 
are  presented,  as  gathered  from  periodicals,  magazines, 
newspapers,  addresses,  correspondence,  etc.,  in  order  to 
ascertain  whether  or  no  the  results  of  direct  primaries 
have  been  sufficiently  favorable  to  justify  the  plea  for  an 
extension  of  their  principle,  and  for  the  adoption  of 
some  plan  upon  a  wider  scale  for  further  experimenta- 
tion. 

Part  IV,  which  discusses  the  relation  existing  between 
the  stronger  forces  of  reform  operating  in  the  field  of 
polities  at  the  present  time,  must  not  be  considered  as  a 
contribution  to  the  arguments  bearing  upon  these  sub- 
jects, but  is  added  for  the  purpose  of  arriving  at  some 
conclusion  as  to  what  the  proper  order,  or  program,  for 
the  prosecution  of  the  various  reforms  may  be.  It  is 
hoped  that  in  this  way  the  tremendous  waste  of  energy, 
resulting  from  the  independent  prosecution  of  really 
complimentary  reforms,  may  be  avoided  through  the  con- 
centration of  the  various  reformatory  efforts  in  a  logical, 
systematic,  and  effective  manner,  for  the  realization  of 
their  common  end — good  government. 

The  author  wishes  to  acknowledge  his  obligations  to  all 

those  who  have  in  one  way  or  another  assisted  him  in  the 

preparation  of  this  work. 

Eknst  C.  Meyer. 
Madison,  Wis., 

February,  1002. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PART  I. 

THE  CAUCUS  AND  CONVENTION  SYSTEM. 


CHAPTER    I. 

THE  ORIGIN  AND   GROWTH  OP  OUR  NOMINATING 

INSTITUTIONS. 

Page. 

The  four  stages  of  development 2 

The  primitive  caucus '. 4 

The  conference  and  correspondence  committees 6 

Early  delegate  conventions 7 

The  legislative  caucus 10 

The  congressional   caucus 12 

Power  of  the  legislative  and  congressional  caucuses 13 

Fall  of  the  congressional  and  legislative  caucuses 15 

Their  baneful    legacy 17 

Rise  of  the  modem  caucus  and  convention  system 18 

Organization  of  the  system IS 

Operation  of  the  system 19 

CHAPTER    II. 

POLITICAL    COMBINATIONS,    THEIR    NATURE    AND 

CAUSE. 

The  complex  conditions  of  modern  politics —  23 

Increase  in  population  and  wealth 24 

The  unsettled  population  of  manufacturing  communities..  24 

The  influence  of  the  commercial  spirit 25 

Specialization   of    effort 25 

The  business  of  politics 25 

The  educated  classes  of  society  and  politics 26 

The  American  college  and  public  affairs 28 

Estrangement  of  higher  education  and  the  pubJic  service. .  28 

A  source  of  strength  to  political  combinations 30 

The  necessity  of  a  simpler  nominating  system 31 


viii  Talle  of  Contents. 

CHAPTER    III. 

THE   CORRUPT  CAUCUS   OF   TO-DAY. 

Page. 

The  definition  of  "caucus"  and  "primary" 34 

Use  of  the  terms  in  different  localities 35 

The  importance  of  the  primary 36 

The  order  of  reform 3b 

The  incentive  to  corruption  in  the  city  primary 61 

The  advantages  of  the  country  primary 38 

The  Australian  ballot  system  and  regulated  primaries 38 

Corruption  in  party-regulated  primaries 39 

The  false  application  of  the  principle  of  rule-regulation..  40 

A  mistaken  idea  of  political  liberty 40 

Corruption  due  to  the  Australian  ballot  system 41 

Caucus  laws  and  their  inefficiency 41 

Typical  devices  for  the  control  of  the  primary 4Z 

Why  the  voter  stays  at  home 42 

The  stayat-home  spirit 43 

Discouraging  aspects  of  "machine  politics" 44 

Independent  thought  in  politics 45 

CHAPTER    IV. 

THE  CONVENTION  IN  ITS  BEST  DAYS. 

The  convention  and  party  success 49 

The  estimation  of  a  party's  strength  at  a  convention 50 

The  selection  of  candidates 50 

The  arousing  of  party  enthusiasm 51 

The  conciliation  of  party  factions 51 

Candidates,  their  nationality  and  residence 5 J 

The  formulation  of  a  platform 5  ^ 

The    convention    and    party    discrimination o^ 

A  school  of  practical  politics 53 

CHAPTER    V. 

THE  MODERN  CORRUPT  CONVENTION. 

The  causes  of  corruption  in  conventions 55 

Factors  which  determine  the  extent  of  corruption 55 

External  and  internal  corrupting  influences 56 

The  three  classes  of  delegates 57 

The  politician  and  *he  workable  candidate 57 

The  complexity  of  the  convention  system 58 

The  men  who  act  as  delegates 58 

The  "machine"  proxy 59 

The  "machine"  committee  of  credentials 59 

The  practice  of  a  second  choice 59 

The  extent  of   corruption "* 


Table  of  Contents.  ix 

Page. 

Internal   corrupting    influences 60 

Personal  considerations  and  public  ambitions  of  delegates  61 

The  "machine"  platform 62 

The  convention  as  a  stronghold  of  the  "machine" 63 

The  remedy  lies  with  the  people 64 

CHAPTER    VI. 

PROPOSED   AND  APPLIED   METHODS    OF  NOMINATION. 

A  classification  of  remedies 66 

The  "sub-ward"  scheme 67 

The  proportional  and  minority  representation  schemes 68 

The  legalization   of   the  caucus 69 

The  inadequacy  of  the  caucus  laws 70 

The  Clark  system  of  nomination 71 

The  "open  book"  method   of  nomination 73 

The  direct  primary 74 

Direct  and  indirect  nominations 74 

Nominations  by  instructed  delegates  and  by  direct  vote. .  75 

Objections  to  uninstructed  delegates 75 

Direct  nominations  and  instructed  delegates 76 

The  capacity  of  the  people  to  choose  their  own  candidates. .  77 

The  influence  of  the  ignorant  element  in  population 78 

Educational  qualifications  for  suffrage 78 

The  successful  fusion  of  wisdom  and  ignorance  at  the  polls  79 


PART  II. 


DIRECT  PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES. 


CHAPTER    I. 

THE  MOVEMENT   FOR  BETTER  PRIMARIES. 

The  origin  of  the  direct  primary. 84 

Primary  reform  and  ballot  reform 84 

Diversity  of  direct  primary  legislation 87 

The  inadequacy  of  the  Australian  ballot  reform 87 

The  increasing  difficulties  of  the  primary 88 

A  false  notion  of  political  liberty 89 

The  imperfection  of  primary  legislation 89 

Direct  primary  legislation  from  1880-1900 90 

Direct  primary  reform  in  1901 93 

^'Machine"  opposition 95 


X  Table  of  Contents. 

Page. 

Direct  primary  laws  enacted  in  1901 96 

The  strength  of  the  movement  for  direct  primaries «! 

The  National  Primary  Election  League 98 

The  prospects  of  direct  primary  reform »» 

CHAPTER    II. 

PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  IN  THE  NORTH  ATLANTIC 

STATES. 

Direct  primaries  in  Massachusetts 102 

The  caucus  law  of  1894 103 

Primary  elections  outside  of  Boston i^j^ 

Primaries  in  Boston • Y]^ 

Experience  with  enrollment  in  Massachusetts -iiJ ' 

The  New  York  primary  election  law  of  1899 109 

The  general  scope  of  the  law li|J 

The  power  of  the  general  party  committee Ill 

Provisions  for  party  organization Ill 

The  New  York  enrollment  system 112 

How  primary  elections  are  to  be  held llo 

New   Jersey   primaries 119 

Delaware  primaries 1^J| 

Maryland  direct  primaries •  •  •  •  l-^*^ 

CIIAPTEE     III. 

AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  GENERAL  FEATURES  AND 
RESULTS  OF  SOUTHERN  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

The  power  of  political  parties  over  primaries 121 

Optional   primaries 1;^! 

Employed  by  the  Democratic  party 1^- 

The  extreme  importance  of  the  primary  election 123 

The  purpose  of  the  direct  vote  system 1-3 

The  rudimentary  primary  legislation 124 

The  freedom  of  the  political  party 125 

The  expense  of  the  direct  primaries 12o 

The  position  of  the  dominant  i-arty 126 

Individual   platforms 127 

Personal  politics  in  the  South 127 

Popularity  of  primaries  in  rural  districts 129 

The  necessity  of  more  thorough  laws ISO 

CHAPTER    IV. 

SOUTHERN  DIRECT   PRIMARY   LEGISLATION. 

Primary  election  laws  of  South  Carolina 131 

The  conduct  of  the  nominating  campaign 133 

Majority  nominations  in  South  Carolina 135 


Table  of  Contents.  xi 

Page. 

The  importance  of  the  primary  election 135 

Direct  primaries  in  North  Carolina 136 

Direct  primary  legislation  in  Virginia 136 

Direct  primary  legislation  in  Georgia 139 

Direct  primary  legislation  in  Florida 140 

Direct  primary  legislation  in  Alabama 141 

Direct  primary  legislation  in  Mississippi 141 

Majority  nominations  in  Mississippi 142 

Direct  primary  legislation  in  Louisiana 143 

Direct  primaries  in  Texas 144 

CHAPTER    V. 

DIRECT  PRIIMARIES  WHICH  ARE  REGULATED  LARGELY 

BY  PARTY  RULES. 

General  primary  election  laws  of  Pennsylvania 146 

The  Crawford   county  system 147 

The  Crawford  county  local  law  of  1S72 148 

The  operation  of  the  Crawford  system 149 

The  Lancaster  county  local  law  of  1871 150 

The  Delaware  county  local  law  of  1871 151 

The  disadvantages  of  the  Delaware  county  system 152 

The  local  laws  of  Erie  and  Beaver  counties 153 

The  Lackawanna  county  system 153 

Agitation  for  a  general  direct  primary  law 154 

The  Ohio  primary  election  law  of  1898 155 

The  operation  of  the  Ohio  system 157 

The  attendance  at  the  polls 158 

Suggested  improvements  of  the  Ohio  law 158 

Tennessee    primary    legislation 160 

Party  primaries  in  eastern  Tennessee 160 

Agitation  for  a  new  law 161 

Primary  elections  in  West  Virginia 162 

CHAPTEE    VI. 

DIRECT  PRIMARIES  WHICH  ARE  REGULATED  LARGELY 

BY  STATUTE. 

Indiana  counties  employing  direct  primaries 163 

Typical  party  rules  for  the  conduct  of  direct  primaries. . .  163 

The  Indiana  law  of  1901 165 

The  Kentucky  law  of  1880 169 

The  Kentucky  law  of  1892 170 

The  power  of  the  party  committee  under  the  Kentucky  law  171 

Suggested  improvements  of  the  Kentucky  law 171 

Representatives  of  candidates  as  watchers 173 

The  assessment  of  candidates 173 

Favorable  results  in  spite  of  imperfect  legislation 174 

Missouri  direct  primary  laws 175 


xii  Talle  of  Contents, 

CHAPTER    VII. 

IMPERFECT  DIRECT  PRIMARY  LAWS  AND  PARTY 
SYSTEMS  WEST  OF  THE  MISSISSIPPI. 

Page. 

The  direct  primary  in  North  Dakota 180 

The  direct  primary  in  South  Daliota 181 

The  direct  primary  in  Colorado 18^ 

The  direct  primary  in  Iowa 18^ 

The  direct  primary  in  Kansas 18'4 

The  representative  vote  system  of  Jackson  county,  Kansas.  184 

The  direct  primary  law  of  Nebraska 18^ 

The  direct  primary  in  Lincoln,  Nebraska 18» 

The  primary  election  law  of  Arkansas 18» 

The  primary  election   law   of  Utah 190 

The  primary  election  law  of  Nevada 191 

CHAPTER   VIII. 

THE  PRIMARY  ELECTION  OP  DELEGATES  TO  CONVEN- 
TIONS UNDER  COMPULSORY  LAWS. 

Early  corruption  in  California 193 

The  struggle  which  produced  the  law  of  1866 194 

The  main  features  of  the  law  of  1866 195 

The  California  primary  election  laws  of  1895,  1897  and  1899  196 

The  influence  of  the  courts 197 

The  California  constitutional  amendment  of  1899 198 

The  California  law  of  1901 200 

The  Illinois  laws  of  1885,  1887,  1889,  1898 205 

The  Illinois  law  of  1899 206 

The  Illinois  direct  primary  bill  of  1901 209 

Causes  of  its  defeat 210 

The  Washington  primary  election  laws  of  1890  and  1895..  211 

CHAPTER   IX. 

DIRECT    PRIMARIES    IN    MINNESOTA. 

The  movement  for  direct  primaries  in  Minnesota 213 

The  Minnesota  primary  election  laws  of  1895  and  1897..  214 

The  Hennepin  county  law  of  1899 215 

The  Minnesota  direct  primary  law  of  1901 216 

Changes  from  the  original  Minnesota  bill  of  1901 222 

CHAPTER    X. 

DIRECT  PRIMARIES   IN  OREGON  AND  MICHIGAN. 

The  scope  of  the  Oregon  laws  of  1901 226 

The  Oregon  primary  election  law  of  1891 226 

The  Oregon  law  of  1901  governing  delegate  conventions..  227 


Talle  of  Contents.  xiii 

Page, 
The  Oregon  law  of  1901  governing  nominations  by  direct 

vote 230 

Primary  legislation  in  Michigan 235 

The  Colby  direct  primary  bills  of  1897,  1899,  and  1901 236 

The  Michigan  direct  primary  law  of  1901 237 

CHAPTER    XI. 

ENACTED  AND  PROPOSED  PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  IN 

WISCONSIN. 

The  reform  movement  in  Wisconsin 241 

The  caucus  laws  of  1891,  1893,  1895,  1897 241 

The  caucus  law  of  1899 242 

The  principle  of  a  direct  vote  as  applied  in  Wisconsin..   243 

The  origin  of  the  movement  for  direct  primaries 244 

The  Lewis  bill  of  1897 245 

The  La  Follette  addresses  of  1898 245 

Comments  on  the  La  Follette  addresses 246 

The  Bryant  bill  of  1899 247 

The   direct  primary  platform   plank  of  1900 248 

The  Stevens  bill  as  introduced z49 

The  Stevens  bill  as  returned  from  the  committee  rooms. . ,   250 

Opposition   in   the   Assembly 251 

The  Senate  substitutes  for  the  Stevens  bill 252 

Objections  to  the  Hagemeister  bill 253 

The  compromise  bill  of  the  Assembly 254 

Governor  La  Follette's  veto  of  the  Hagemeister  bill 254 

The  effect  of  the  veto z56 

The  Wisconsin  Republican  League 257 


PART  III. 


AN  ANALYSIS  OF  THE  MAIN  ARGUMENTS  FOR 
AND  AGAINST  THE  DIRECT  PRIMARY. 


CHAPTER    I. 

A  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

Merit  as  the  final  test 260 

Imperfection  of  direct  primary  legislation 260 

Absence  of  fair  trials  of  the  principle 260 

What  the  direct  primary  hopes  to  accomplish 262 

How  it  hopes  to  accomplish  its  end 262 

The  idea  of  the  direct  primary 262 

The  determination  of  the  field  of  argument 263 


xiv  Table  of  Contents. 

CHAPTEE    II. 

PARTY   ORGANIZATION   UNDER   DIRECT    PRIMARIES. 

Page. 

The  characteristics  of  a  strong  party  organization 264 

Party  organization  under  the  convention  system 264 

Party  organization  under  the  direct  primary 265 

Party  disintegrating  forces  in  the  caucus  or  primary....   266 

Party,  disintegrating  forces  in  the  conventions 267 

The  necessity  of  a  platform 268 

Proposed  solutions  of  the  platform  problem 268  ^ 

Formulation  of  the  platform  by  candidates 269 

Formulation  of  the  platform  by  a  state  central  committee  271 

Formulation  of  the  platform  by  a  convention 272 

A  proposed  plan  for  the  formulation  of  a  platform 272 

The  advantages  of  the  scheme 273 

Party   apostasy   under    direct    primaries 275 

Party  leaders  under  direct  primaries 276 

Conclusion 276 

CHAPTER    III. 

MINORITY    NOMINATONS    UNDER    DIRECT   PRIMARIES. 

Requirements  for  a  place  upon  the  primary  election  ballot  278 

The  expediency  of  requiring  a  fee 279 

The  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  the  nomination  paper  279 

The  constitutionality  of  the  fee 282 

The  actual  number  of  candidates  in  the  field 283 

The  attendance  at  the  polls  under  direct  primaries 285 

The  representative  character  of  candidates 287 

Minority  nominations  under  the  convention  system 288 

Minority  elections 289 

Majority  nomination   schemes 290 

The  Remsen  first  and  second  choice  scheme 290 

The  holding  of  second  primaries 291 

CHAPTFK    IV. 

THE  "MACHINE"  AND  THE  CORPORATION  UNDER 
DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

The  place  of  the  "machine" 293 

Relation  of  "machines"  and  corporations  to  politics 293 

Relation  of  "machi  les"  and  corporations  to  each  other, .  294 

The  modern  corporation  in  politics 296 

Corporate  control  of  nominations 296 

"Machine"  control  under  direct  primaries 298 

The  relation  of  the  lower  classes  to  the  "machine" 299 

The  difficulty  of  effective  corruption 300 

The  open  primary  and  "machine"  control 300 


Tahle  of  Contents.  xv 

Page. 
The  advantages  of  the  "machine"  under  the  convention 

system 300 

The  disadvantage  of  the  "machine"  under  direct  primaries  301 


CHAPTER    V. 

THE   COUNTRY  AND  THE  CITY  VOTER  UNDER  DIRECT 

PRIMARIES. 

The  farmer  in  politics 302 

The  rural  candidates  under  the  convention  system 303 

The  advantages  of  the  city  voter 304 

The  relation  of  the  city  voter  to  the  country  voter 305 

A  favorable  argument  of  experience 305 

Who  cries  for  justice  to  the  farmer 306 

The  country  districts  under  the  Kansas  system 307 

The  one  nominating  vote  per  district  plan 307 

The  nationality  and  the  location  of  candidates 308 

CHAPTER    VI. 

THE  PUBLIC  PRESS  UNDER  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

The  argument  against  the  press 310 

The  press  under  the  Cleveland   direct  primaries 310 

Praises  and  commendations  for  cash 311 

The  confusion  resulting  from  deceptive  journalism 311 

The  "machine-controlled"  newspaper 311 

An  argument  from  the  Wisconsin  press 312 

The  mission  of  the  modern  sound  journal 313 

CHAPTER    VII. 

CANDIDATES   UNDER   DIRECT   PRIMARIES. 

The  natural  advantage  of  wealth 315 

Discriminations  in  fees  and  petitions 318 

The  rich  candidate  under  the  convention  system 317 

The  poor  candidate  under  direct  primaries 317 

Poverty  and  merit  versus  money 317 

Experience   in  Cleveland,  Ohio 318 

Experience   in   Minnesota 318 

The  busy  man  and  the  man  of  leisure 318 

The  busy  man  under  the  convention  system al9 

The  modest  man  under  the  direct  primary 320 

Advantage  of  choice  by  all  the  people 320 

"Machine"  candidates  under  direct  primaries 321 

Conclusion 322 


xvi  Table  of  Contents. 

CHAPTER    VIII. 

MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT  UNDER  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

Page. 

The  bane  of  municipal  government 32-t 

The  doctrine  of  municipal  reform 325 

Party  organization  in  the  municipality 325 

The  necessity  of  organization  in  campaigns 326 

The  "machine"  and  party  politics 326 

State  and  national  politics  in  the  city 327 

Freedom  of  the  city  voter  under  direct  primaries 328 

The  place  of  party  organization  in  the  city 329 

CHAPTER   IX. 

WHO  SHALL  VOTE  AT  THE  PRIMARY? 

The  difficulty  of  the  question 330 

Voting  at  general  elections 331 

The  difference  between  general  and  primary  elections....  331 

Free  party  action  at  the  primary 332 

The  closed  and  the  open  primary  systems 333 

States  using  closed  or  open  primaries 334 

Provisions  for  voting  in  proposed  laws 335 

Classes  of  voters  excluded  by  a  test ^ 336 

The  nomination  of  weak  candidates * 337 

The  difficulties  of  fraudulent  nominations 338 

The  probability  of  fraudulent  nominations 339 

Unrecognized  parties  under  a  test 339 

Against  the  requirement  of  a  test 341 

The  perfunctory  oath   342 

"When  the  legislature  prescribes  the  test 343 

When  the  party  prescribes  the  test 345 

The  authority  which  ought  to  prescribe  the  test 347 

The  form  of  a  test 348 

Present  test  forms  in  law 349 

Conclusion 350 

CHAPTER    X. 

THE   CONSTITUTIONALITY   OP   PRIMARY  ELECTION 

LAWS. 

Important  court  decisions 352 

The  Pennsylvania  decision 353 

The  Colorado  decision 353 

The  New  York  decision 353 

Reasons  for  decisions  of  unconstitutionality 354 

The  California  decision  of  1896 354 

The  California  decision  of  1898 356 

Classes  of  voters   disfranchised 357 

No  decision  as  to  the  constitutionality  of  a  test 358 


Table  of  Contents.  xvii 

Page. 

The  California  decision  of  1900 359 

Discrimination   against  weak  parties 360 

The  possible  invasion  of  parties 360 

The  exclusion  of  weak  parties  from  the  regular  primaries.  361 

The  decision  of  the  circuit  court  of  Oregon 363 

The  invasion   of  party  rights 363 

Wherein   the   unconstitutional   features  of  the   California 

law  of  1899,  and  of  the  Oregon  law  of  1901  differed 365 

The  "opportunity"  or  "possibility"  of  wrong  without  relief  365 

The  constitutionality  of  the  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin 367 

The  superiority  of  the  Stevens  bill 367 

The  constitutionality  of  caucus  laws 368 

How  to  escape  the  hands  of  the  courts 370 

A  proposed  form  of  a  test 370 

Decision  of  the  supreme  court  of  Oregon,  1901 372 

State  constitutions  must  shelter  good  laws 373 

Points  raised  in  decisions  bearing  upon  primary  elections  373 

CHAPTER    XI. 

THE   EXPENSE   OF   DIRECT   PRIMARIES. 

The  sources  of  expense  under  direct  primaries 379 

The  methods  of  defraying  the  expense 380 

Expense  under  compulsory  or  under  optional  primaries.  .   381 

Expense  under  public  or  under  party  primaries 381 

Primaries  a  public  expense 382 

Fees   and    assessments 382 

The  expense  of  the  caucus  and  convention  system 383 

Estimated  expense  of  direct  primaries  in  Wisconsin 384 

Estimated  expense  of  the  convention  system  in  Wisconsin  384 

The  small  expense  of  direct  primaries 385 

The  expense  of  good  government 386 

CHAPTER    XII. 

ARE  DIRECT  PRIMARIES   WORTHY   OF  A  TRIAL? 

Misrepresented  and  prejudicial  facts 387 

A  general  view  of  the  field  of  experience 387 

The  failings  of  the  old  Crawfora  system 388 

The  difficulties  of  direct  primaries  in  the  South 388 

The  adverse  experiences  in  Cleveland,  Ohio 389 

Conclusion  as  to  the  importance  of  adverse  evidence 390 

Successful   party   systems 390 

Favorable  results  in  Kentucky 390 

Minnesota  evidence  and  its  value 391 

Direct   nominations    for    state    offices 392 

Direct  primaries  never  abandoned 39,i 

The   possibilities  of   adverse   experience 393 

The  probabilities  of  adverse  experience 394 

Wrong  interpretation  of  arguments 394 


xviii  Tahle  of  Contents. 

Page. 

Deceptive  method  of  opposition 395 

The  unfair  use  of  adverse  arguments 395 

The  demand  for  direct  primaries 39b 

CHAPTER    XIII. 

THE   ESSENTIAL  FEATURES  OF  A   GOOD   DIRECT 
PRIMARY  LAW. 

No  uniformity   possible 397 

The  scope  of  the  law 397 

Fall  primaries,  when  held 399 

What  parties  shall  participate 399 

Concurrent  primaries 400 

Notices,  when  published 400 

Who  may  be  a  candidate 400 

Nomination    papers 401 

Distribution   of    signers 401 

Nature   of   signatures 402 

Non-partisan  tickets 403 

When  nomination  papers  filed 403 

Transmission  of  lists  of  candidates 404 

Publication  of  lists  of  candidates 404 

Furnishing  of  supplies 404 

Primary  election  officers 405 

Qualification  and  manner  of  voting 405 

No    pasters —  .  405 

Arrangement  of  ballot 406 

The  requirement  of  a  test 406 

Ballot   boxes 407 

Challengers 407 

Hours  of  open  polls 407 

Canvass  under  open  primary  system 408 

Canvass  under  closed  primary  system 408 

The  party  platform 409 

Selection   of  partv   committeemen 410 

Organization   of   party   committees 410 


PART  IV. 


THE  DIRECT  PRIMARY  IN   ITS  RELATION  TO 
OTHER  REFORMS. 


CHAPTER    I. 

OUR   CIVIL   SERVICE   AND   ITS   REFORM. 

The  main  cause  of  corruption  in  politics 420 

The  influence  of  the   spoils   system 421 

The  paramount  reform  of  to-day 422 


2'ahle  of  Contents.  xix 

Page. 

The  "machine"  and  civil  service  reform 423 

Political   and   non-political    offices 424 

The  demoralizing  influence  of  patronage 425 

Civil  service  legislation 426 

Civil   service  rules  in   cities 427 

Method  of  civil  service  reform 429 

English  experiences  in  reform 429 

The  effect  of  undue  haste  in  reform 430 

Imperialism  and  civil  service  reform 430 

The  principles  of  civil  service  reform  legislation 432 

CHAPTEK    II. 

THE  REDUCTION  AND  REDISTRIBUTION  OF  ELECTIVE 
AND  APPOINTIVE  OFFICES. 

The  spoils  system  and  the  elective  principle 435 

Elective  and  appointive  county  offices 435 

Elective  offices  in   the   cities 436 

The  problem  in  the  state  governments 437 

Divided  executive  power  in  the  states 437 

Scope  of  the  governor's  appointing  power 43S 

The  appointment  of  heads  of  departments 43S 

Popular  control  over  the  governor 439 

The  advantage  of  greater  central  control 440 

The  terms  of  elective  offices 441 

Cause   of   short   terms 441 

Tendency   towards   longer   terms 442 

The  advantages  of  longer  terms 443 

CHAPTER    III. 

THE  PREVENTION  OF  POLITICAL  CORRUPTION. 

The  aim  of  corrupt  practices  legislation 444 

A  criticism  of  state  laws  in  1895 445 

The  first  corrupt  practices  law 445 

States  having  corrupt  practices  laws 445 

The  scope  of  the  laws 446 

Opposition  to  their  enactment 446 

What  good   laws   would   accomplish 447 

CHAPTER    IV. 

THE  POPULAR  ELECTION  OF  UNITED  STATES 
SENATORS. 

The  influence  of  direct  primaries 448 

Informal  nominations  at  southern  primaries 449 

Why  the  change  is  urged 450 

Senatorial  elections  by  representative  legislatures 4FiO 

The  difficulty  of  amending  the  Constitution 450 


XX  Table  of  Contents. 

CHAPTER    V. 

THE  REFERENDUM   IN   AMERICA. 

Page. 

Relation  of  the  direct  primary  to  direct  legislation 453 

The  referendum  in  the  central  governments 454 

The  referendum  in  the   localities 454 

The  tendency  towards  its  extension 455 

Other  countries  using  the  referendum 45d 

The  advantages  of  direct  legislation 45b 

The  disadvantages   of  direct  legislation 45/ 

Direct  legislation  and  party  government 4bU 

Swiss  and  American  conditions  of  life  contrasted 4bi 

The  inadequacy  of  direct  legislation  as  a  reform  in  the 

United   States •-• '  • :  •  •  Vt"  •: ' ; 

The  probable  future  of  direct  legislation  in  the  United 

States ^^^ 

CHAPTER    VI. 

THE  PROGRAM  OF  REFORM. 

The  referendum  and  proportional  representation 464 

The  claims  for  proportional  representation 464 

The  sham  representation  of  to-day 465 

The  necessity  of  an  active  legislature 46b 

The  program  of  reform ^^ 

Co-operation   in   reform ^°° 

The  people  and  reform 4bS 

Lack  of  harmony  between  the  people  and  the  legislatures  4b» 

The  doorway  to  all  reform 469 

The  prospects  of  primary  reform 4<0 


NOMINATING  SYSTEMS. 


CHAPTEE  I. 


THE   ORIGIN  AND   GROWTH   OF   OUR   NOMINATING 

INSTITUTIONS. 

Like  most  of  our  political  institutions,  whether  con- 
stitutional or  extra-constitutional,  our  modern  caucus 
and  convention  system  is  an  evolution.  After  nearly 
two  centuries  of  ever-changing  growi;h,  its  appearance 
bears  few  traces  of  its  original  features.  The  main, 
forces  which  shaped  its  development,  in  spite  of  oppos- 
ing tendencies,  sprung  from  one  strong  central  pur- 
pose,— the  creation  of  nominating  institutions  thor- 
oughly representative  in  character,  and  fully  acceptahle 
to  a  free  and  liberty-loving  people.  Not  only  was  a  rep- 
resentative democracy  the  cradle  of  its  birth,  but  it  was 
also  the  source  of  its  life  and  power  during  that  long 
period  of  struggle  which  fr>llowed,  for  as  our  nominat- 
ing system  was  bom  of  the  people,  it  grew  in  ever- 
changing  forms  in  order  that  it  might  better  seiwe  the 
people.  Many  were  the  threatening  dangers  that  beset 
its  progress;  many  the  changes  that  swept  in  and  out, 
in  the  course  of  this  quest  after  more  representative  in- 
stitutions for  the  choice  of  the  servants  of  the  people. 
Yet  all  were  made  to  suit  the  form  and  temper  of  the 
times,  and  all  are  closely  linked  together  in  a  common 

chain  of  progress. 
1 


2  Caucus  and  Convention  Syatem. 

It  is  diiScult  to  classify  tlie  evolution  of  our  oaiicus 
and  convention  system  into  eras  of  development  How- 
ever, for  the  sake  of  convenience,  and  probably  also  for 
that  of  clearness,  certain  sudden  and  comparatively 
rapid  changes  may  be  taken  as  bounding  landmarks  of 
growth.  Four  such  periods  may  be  distingiiished.  The 
first  begins  with  the  first  quarter  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury and  closes  with  the  Revolution.  It  marks  the 
origin  and  primitive  growth  of  our  local  nominating  in- 
stitution— the  caucus,  which  in  the  course  of  this  period 
developed  from  a  secret,  private,  unorganized  gather- 
ing, to  an  open,  irregular  but  public  meeting. 

The  second  period  closes  with  the  establishment  of  the 
present  government  in  17S7.  It  marks  the  appearance 
of  local  conventions  of  irregularly  elected  delegates,  as 
supplementary  to  the  caucuses,  and  like  them,  without 
continu.ed  life  from  year  to  year.  They  are  not  called 
by  any  definite  authority ;  they  may  not  be  called  at  all, 
and  form  no  part  of  any  regular  political  system.  In 
addition  to  this,  there  also  sprung  up  the  conference  and 
correspondence  systems,  which  like  the  irregular  con- 
ventions aimed  at  better  representation  in  our  nominat- 
ing machinery. 

Tlie  third  period  embraces  about  thirty-five  years 
and  ends  in  1824.  It  is  characterized  by  a  rapid  ex- 
tension and  further  development  of  the  local  nominat- 
ing institutions  already  mentioned,  and  also  by  the  rise 
of  central  nominating  bodies  both  state  and  national, 
the  former  beijg  kno-\vn  as  the  legislative  caucuses,  and 
the  latter  as  the  congressional  caucus.  Their  destruc- 
tion heralds  the  close  of  the  period. 

The  fourth  period  reaches  into  the  present  time.     Its 


Its  Origin.  3 

passing  marks  the  development  of  a  complete  system 
of  caucuses  and  conventions,  both  loccal  and  central, 
through  the  overthrow  of  the  congTessional  and  legisla- 
tive caucuses  and  the  institution  of  a  pure  delegate  con- 
vention system  thoroughly  representative  in  theory; 
and  through  the  consolidation  of  local  and  central  nomi- 
nating bodies  into  one  systematic  whole,  possessing  con- 
tinuity of  existence  and  unity  of  action. 

At  present  it  seems  as  though  we  were  upon  the  thresh- 
old of  a  fifth  era  of  growth,  marked  by  the  abolition  of 
the  corinipted  cmicus  and  convention,  and  the  substitu- 
tion therefor  of  the  system  of  direct  nomination.  The 
strong  movement  in  this  direction  may  yet  carry  the 
change  far  beyond  our  speculation.  The  same  forces  that 
have  controlled  the  development  of  our  nominating  in- 
stitutions in  the  main,  so  far,  seem  to  be  operating  to 
produce  this  latest  change.  There  is  the  same  quest  for 
purer  representation  which  through  one  cause  or  an- 
other, has  been  repeatedly  defeated  in  the  past.  Gov- 
ernment by  the  people's  servants  is  still  the  end  sought, 
and  since  this  begins  with  the  nomination  of  the  govern- 
ing officers,  it  is  proposed  by  those  who  advocate  the 
change,  to  bring  the  power  to  choose  directly  home  to  the 
people. 

The  whole  history  of  the  evolution  of  our  nominat- 
ing institutions  goes  to  prove  that  the  farther  they  are 
removed  from  the  influence  of  govei*nment  officials,  and 
from  the  control  of  professional  politicians,  and  the 
nearer  they  are  placed  to  the  true  source  of  government, 
the  people,  the  more  responsive  are  they  to  the  will  of 
the  people,  the  nearer  is  the  goal  of  true  representation, 


4  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

and  the  more  nearly  liave  we  won  the  battle  for  good 
government. 

Each  of  the  periods  of  development  will  now  be 
studied  more  in  detail,  in  order  to  substantiate  the  state- 
ments just  made;  to  see  how  the  final  product  of  our 
nominating  machinery  came  to  be;  and  to  learn  what 
lessons  may  be  culled  from  its  evolution,  as  an  aid  in 
the  solution  of  the  primary  and  convention  problem, 
which  at  present  is  receiving  the  attention  of  many  of 
our  earnest  and  serious  reformers  in  the  field  of  politics. 
The  exact  nature  and  time  of  the  origin  of  the  caucus, 
is  a  matter  of  much  dispute.  However,  authorities 
agree  that  it  rose  out  of  the  necessity  for  some  nominat- 
ing body  through  which  candidates  might  be  presented 
to  the  public  as  select  persons  for  elective  ofiices.  Since 
local  elective  offices  were  created  far  back  in  our  early 
history  it  will  be  perfectly  safe  to  associate  the  birth  of 
the  caucus  with  that  time. 

The  caucus  began  as  a  private  and  more  or  less  secret 
institution.^  According  to  the  memoirs  of  Samuel 
Adams,  as  early  as  1Y25,  his  father  "and  twenty  others 
used  to  meet,  make  a  caucus,  and  lay  their  plans  for  in- 
troducing certain  persons  into  places  of  trust  and  power. 
By  acting  in  concert  they  generally  carried  the  elections 
to  their  o\\ti  mind."  In  John  Adams'  diary  of  Feb- 
ruary, 1763,  we  also  find  a  reference  that  the  "caucus 
club"  met  in  the  garret  of  Tom  Dawes  of  Boston,  and 
chose  "local  officers."  It  was  in  such  private,  secret 
gatherings,  without  organization,  and  without  public  no- 
tice of  time  and  place  of  meeting,  attended  only  by  a 

» Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  VoL  V,  p.  258. 


Its  Origin.  5 

narrow  circle  of  specially  interested  politicians,  that  tlie 
caucus  had  its  origin.^ 

Such  an  undemocratic  institution  could,  however,  not 
last.  Several  years  before  the  opening  of  the  struggle  in 
which  our  fathers  cast  England  from  this  land,  their 
republican  ideals,  and  their  yearning  for  equality  of 
rights  in  politics,  as  in  other  things,  forced  upon  the 
caucus  a  more  public  character.  The  change  began  in 
that  cradle  of  so  many  of  our  public  institutions, — New 
England.  The  time  and  place  of  meeting  came  to  be 
proclaimed  to  all  by  the  town  crier,  and  thus  came  to 
pass  the  first  public  caucus  in  which  the  staunch  New 
Englanders  met  in  their  primitive  way  a  night  or  two 
before  election  and  nominated  their  candidates. 

The  self-governing  communities  of  New  England, 
presenting  as  they  did  the  purest  type  of  democracy, 
found  the  caucus  a  success.  How  could  it  be  other- 
wise, for  sound  as  it  is  in  theory,  it  here  existed  imder 
ideal  conditions  in  the  midst  of  an  honest,  intelligent 
commimity,  which  w^as  vitally  interested  in  doing  all 
things  well,  and  was  personally  acquainted  with  all  the 
candidates.  How  strikingly  different  the  conditions 
under  which  our  modei-n  caucus  must  operate!  Need 
we  wonder  that  abuses  have  crept  into  it  ? 

Erom  the  time  of  its  popularization  do^vn  to  Wash- 
ington's administration,  the  history  of  the  caucus  is 
found  mainly  in  its  extension  to  all  the  colonies,  and  in 
its  rapid  growth  esi>ecially  during  the  Eevolution  and 
under  the  Confederation,  when  the  assumption  of  wider 
governmental  powers  by  the  colonies  greatly  increased 
the  number  of  electi%^e  offices. 

»  Lalor's  Cyclooedia  of  Pol.  Science,  Vol.  I,  p.  358;  Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V, 
p  354. 


6  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

In  tlie  course  of  tliis  period,  conference  and  corre- 
spondence committees  whicli  were  organized  to  perform 
diverse  matters  of  State,  also  came  to  be  utilized  for 
obtaining  information  upon  the  popularity  and  standing 
of  candidates  for  offices  embracing  more  than  a  small 
local  area.  Here  we  have  the  first  indication  of  the  in- 
adequacy of  the  caucus  as  a  representative  nominating 
lx>dy,  and  also  the  first  step  in  the  direction  of  delegate 
conventions.  These  committees  came  to  be  of  supreme 
importance  at  the  time  of  the  Revolution,  and  imperfect 
though  they  were  with  their  many  varied  functions, 
they  performed  valuable  services  as  auxiliaries  to  the 
nominating  caucus,  and  bridged  the  way  to  the  nominat- 
ing convention  which  was  soon  to  come.^ 

The  year  ITSO  ushered  in  a  great  change,  and  opened 
up  the  third  period  in  the  history  of  our  nominating  in- 
stitutions. Consequent  upon  the  Revolution  there  came 
a  general  readjustment  of  our  political  machinery 
which  culminated  in  the  establishment  of  the  present 
government.  As  a  result,  there  was  a  great  increase  in 
the  number  of  elective  offices  as  well  as  a  creation,  or  a 
readjustment  of  the  smaller  political  units,  while  the 
prevailing  idea  of  the  impropriety  and  injustice  of  self- 
nomination,  and  of  a  personal  canvass  ^  of  votes,  made 
some  nominating  and  canvassing  machinery  absolutely 
necessary  throughout  the  country. 

There  was,  hence,  a  rapid  extension  of  the  caucus 
system,  which,  however,  was  found  entirely  inadequate 
where  the  conscituency  was  large  or  the  district  exten- 

'  Atner.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  255.     In  some  cases  the  committees  confined 
themselves  exclusively  to  political  matters. 
•Arner.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  256. 


Its  Origin.  7 

sive,  so  that  a  mass-meeting  of  all  tlie  voters  would  liave 
been  unwieldy,  and  a  gathering  effected  only  with  great 
difficulty.  This  obstacle  -wns  overcome  through  the  cre- 
ation of  a  new  institution,  the  "representative  caucus," 
composed  of  delegates  selected  in  primary  caucuses  held 
in  case  of  cities  in  the  wards,  and  in  case  of  counties  in 
the  townships.  The  introduction  of  these  meetings  of 
delegates  which  took  to  themselves  the  name  of  "nomi- 
nating conventions,"  or  more  briefly,  "conventions,"  is 
the  most  important  landmark  in  the  third  era  of  the  de- 
velopment of  our  nominating  machinery  and  gives  to  it 
a  decidedly  modem  character. 

This  advance  to  our  modem  dele2;ate  svstem.  was, 
however,  not  accomplished  by  a  sudden  jump.  There 
were  many  wavering  steps,  and  many  attempts  to  solve 
the  problem  of  representation  by  other  means.  Mass 
meetings  in  which  the  people  of  the  neighborhood  were 
numerous  while  the  inhabitants  of  the  more  remote 
localities  were  barely  represented,  were  the  rule  even 
as  late  as  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  centuiy,  although 
traces  of  county  nominating  conventions  begin  to  appear 
at  that  time.  The  unrepresentative  character  of  these 
mass  meetings,  which  was  increased  in  cases  where  the 
elective  offices  went  beyond  the  confines  of  the  county, 
laid  them  open  to  serious  objections,  and  gave  a  new  im- 
petus to  the  organization  of  the  "committees  of  corre- 
spondence" and  "conference"  to  which  reference  has  al- 
ready been  made. 

The  committees  of  correspondence  were  generally 
composed  of  a  few  public-spirited  men  who  dispatched 
circulars  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  various  counties  to  as- 
certain their  views  upon  the  public  questions  of  the  day, 


8  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

and  to  learn  their  preferences  as  to  candidates  for  the 
different  elective  offices.  They  differed  from  the  analo- 
gous committees  of  Revolutionary  and  Confederation 
days  in  that  their  functions  were  generally  not  many 
and  varied,  but  were  confined  to  matters  strictly  per- 
taining to  political  nominations.^ 

The  conference  system  which  also  became  quite  com- 
mon was  adopted  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
the  Senate  of  the  State,  or  for  the  Federal  Congress. 
The  ''conferees"  or  "electors"  were  appointed  in  county 
meetings  and  were  required  to  submit  their  elections  to 
the  ratification  of  the  general  county  meetings  which, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  primitive  democracies  of  New  Eng- 
land, theoretically  retained  their  full  powers. ^  The  con- 
ference system  may  hence  be  looked  upon  as  fulfilling 
the  functions  of  the  state  convention  which  succeeded  it, 
while  the  correspondence  system  was  more  generally 
confined  to  the  lesser  political  units  and  may  be  looked 
upon  as  being  the  predecessor  of  the  county  and  dis- 
trict conventions. 

The  practice  of  electing  delegates  to  conventions, 
however,  won  special  favor  wherever  it  was  tried  and 
during  the  first  years  of  this  century  seems  to  have  be- 
come fairly  common  for  county  nominations,  while  as 
early  as  1788  a  few  isolated  attempts  were  made  to 
bring  together  delegates  from  the  whole  State  for  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  Congress,  or  for  the  elec- 
toral college  entrusted  with  the  election  of  the  Presi- 
dent and  Vice-President  of  the  United  Sta,tes.  It  may 
be  said  that  the  delegate  convention  system  developed 
from  the  smaller  political   divisions,   outward   to  the 

»  Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  255.  »  Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  256. 


Its  Origin,  9 

larger  ones,  beginning  witli  the  local  county  conven- 
tions, and  ending  witk  those  of  the  State  and  of  the 
Nation. 

But  these  earlj  delegate  conventions  must  not  be 
looked  upon  as  having  been  in  all  respects  like  those  of 
to-day.  They  possessed  neither  permanence  nor  fixed 
organization.  They  were  composed  in  an  irregular  way, 
and  were  but  short-lived.  No  provision  was  made  for 
their  annual  meeting,  but  they  were  created  anew  for 
each  special  occasion  by  the  initiative  of  a  private  cau- 
cus, or  by  a  public  meeting  of  some  kind  which  invited 
its  neighbors  to  send  delegates  to  a  common  rendezvous. 
Too  often,  also,  the  representation  of  different  locali- 
ties was  neither  complete  nor  direct.  The  decisions 
taien  in  the  conventions  were  not  binding;  the  leaders, 
at  times,  of  their  own  authority  made  modifications  in 
the  settled  list  of  candidates  according  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  electoral  situation;  sometimes  the  local 
vot-ers  recast  the  "ticket"  as  they  thought  proper ;  while 
candidates  in  their  turn  did  not  consider  themselves 
bound  by  the  nominations  made  and  often  the  com- 
petitors for  the  elective  ofiices  who  had  not  been  ac- 
cepted went  on  with  their  candidatures  just  the  same 
and  offered  themselves  to  the  electorate.  The  distinc- 
tion of  parties  even,  was  not  always  observed  and  mixed 
lists  were  made  up. 

It  is  not  these  primitive  conventions  of  delegates 
which  were  themselves  without  organization,  and  which 
died  with  the  day  that  created  them,  that  were  to  fur- 
nish the  fixed  fonn  to  the  parties  in  their  extra-consti- 
tutional existence  in  which  nomination  to  office  was  to 
become  the  most  important  function.     This  machinery 


10  Caucus  and  Convention  Systein. 

grew  up  iiiider  the  shadow  of  our  constitutional  struc- 
ture, namely  in  the  state  legislatures,  and  in  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States.^  The  previous  caucus  and 
convention  system  needed  the  infusion  of  the  ideas  of 
system,  of  continuity  of  existence,  of  regularity,  of 
binding  action,  and  of  party  distinction,  to  mould  it 
into  our  modem  svstem.  These  ideas  are  the  contrihu- 
tion  of  the  legislative  and  congressional  caucuses  which 
for  a  period  of  about  a  quarter  of  a  century  occupied 
the  most  important  position  in  our  nominating  ma- 
chinery. 

Both  the  state  and  national  caucuses  were  not  called 
into  being  arbitrarily,  but  like  the  rudimentary  nominat- 
ing machinery  already  sketched,  they  were  a  growth 
finding  their  origin  in  the  necessities  of  the  time,  and 
dying  out  when  their  services  were  no  longer  required, 
or  they  failed  to  perform  them  properly. 

The  need  for  central  nominating  bodies  in  the  States 
rose  with  the  creation  of  their  central  governments.  It 
has  already  been  seen  how  the  need  for  a  nominating 
system  in  the  localities  brought  forth  a  loosely  con- 
structed and  periodical  machinery.  For  the  eleotive 
offices  bestowed  in  each  Stat©  by  the  whole  body  of  its 
voters,  such  as  governor,  lieutenant-governor,  or  presi- 
dential elector,  the  necessity  of  a  preliminary  under- 
standing as  to  the  candidates  was  still  greater  than  for 
the  smaller  territorial  units  and  it  could  only  be  suit- 
ably effected  in  a  single  meeting  for  the  whole  State. 
The  conference  system,  and  to  somve  extent  the  coitc- 
spondence  system,  but  imperfectly  met  this  need  which 
fast  grow  more  pressing. 

>  Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  256. 


Its  Origin.  11 

To  organize  general  meetings  of  representatives  of  all 
the  localities  of  the  State  in  a  regular  way,  was  by  no 
means  easy  in  ordinary  times,  both  on  account  of  the 
means  of  communication  in  those  days,  which  made  a 
journey  to  the  capital  of  the  State  a  formidable  and  al- 
most hazardous  undertaking,  and  because  of  the  difficulty 
of  finding  men  of  leisure  willing  to  leave  their  homes 
for  the  discharge  of  a  temporary,  expensive  duty. 
However,  men  enjoying  the  confidence  of  the  voters  of 
the  State  were  already  assembled  in  the  capital  in  pur- 
suance of  their  functions  as  members  of  the  legislature. 
These  men  were  in  good  position  to  bring  before  their 
constituents  the  names  of  candidates  who  could  com- 
mand the  most  votes  in  the  State.  This  thought  came 
not  only  to  the  public  but  in  particular  to  the  members 
of  the  state  legislatures  themselves,  and  they  laid  hands 
on  the  nomination  of  the  candidates  to  the  state  offices 
Avhile  the  public  looked  on  in  contentment. 

The  evolution  of  the  legislative  caucus  marks  the  be- 
ginning of  the  third  period'  of  development  of  our  nom- 
inating machinery.  The  members  of  both  houses  be- 
longing to  the  same  party  met  semi-officially,  generally 
in  the  legislative  building  itself,  made  their  selections 
and  communicated  them  to  the  voters  by  means  of  a 
proclamation,  which  they  signed  individually.  Some- 
times other  signatures  of  well-known  citizens  who  hap- 
pened to  be  in  the  capital  at  that  moment  were  added, 
to  give  more  weight  to  the  recommendations  of  the  legis- 
lators. To  make  it  more  sure  of  prevailing,  the  latter 
soon  adopted  the  system  of  correspondence  committees, 
which  devoted  their  energies  throughout  the  State  to  the 
success  of  the  list.    Thus  the  correspondence  committee 


12  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

« 

system  was  made  an  auxiliary  of  the  central  or  state 
caucus,  as  it  had  already  been  made  an  auxiliary  of  the 
local  caucus. 

This  practice  of  reconunending  candidates  began  as 
early  as  1790  when  Rhode  Island  brought  its  governor 
and  lieutenant-governor  before  the  people  by  this 
method;  and  by  1796  the  practice  appears  to  have  be- 
come quite  settled  in  all  the  States.  Thus  there  was  in- 
troduced for  the  first  time  a  permanent  party  organi- 
zation nestling  under  the  wing  of  the  legislatures  and 
composed  of  their  very  elements.  It  rose  above  the  more 
or  less  fortuitous  town  and  county  meetings  in  which 
choice  is  made  either  directly,  or  in  the  second  instance, 
of  candidates  for  local  elective  offices.  Since  the  legis- 
lature was  largely  composed  of  the  "old  ruling  class" 
the  legislative  caucuses  were  also  tainted  with  "aristo- 
cratism."  Faith  in  these  natural  leaders  of  society  was 
not  yet  lagging  and  so  their  nominees  were  generally 
received  with  favor. 

In  the  meantime  there  had  arisen  in  the  Federal 
Congress  a  caucus  which,  like  the  legislative  caucuses  of 
the  States  took  in  hand  the  nomination  of  oSicers, — ^in 
this  case,  the  President  and  Vice-President,  and  thereby 
entered  upon  a  course  in  which  the  power  conferred 
upon  the  electors  was  destined  to  disappear.  It  is  nec- 
essary to  devote  a  few  more  words  to  each  of  these  his- 
toric institutions  because  they  exerted  a  profound  in- 
fluence upon  our  modem  caucus  and  convention  system 
which  grew  up  on  their  ruins. 

The  congressional  caucus  developed  out  of  semi- 
official meetings  held  by  the  Federalist  members  of 
Congress  for  the  purpose  of  settling  lines  of  conduct  be- 


Its  Origin.  13 

foreliancl  on  tbe  most  important  questions  coming  before 
Congress.  These  decisions  soon  acquired  a  peculiar 
moral  sanction  wliicb  gave  tliem  almost  legal  authority. 
It  was  Hamilton  who,  in  attempting  to  place  Pinckney 
in  1801,  conceived  the  novel  electoral  maneuvre  of  hav- 
ing the  Federal  party  by  a  formal  decision  of  its  mem- 
bers sanction  the  candidacy  of  his  favorite.  He  suc- 
ceeded, and  thus  the  congressional  caucus  came  into 
being  in  1801,  only  to  pass  through  a  brief  and  stormy 
life  up  to  its  destruction  in  1824. 

From  the  beginning  there  were  protests  against  the 
procedure  of  this  caucus,  as  well  as  against  the  institu- 
tion itself,  as  depriving  the  people  of  a  sacred  right. 
But  it,  nevertheless,  gained  ground  so  that  by  1816,  its 
decisions  had  acquired  such  weight  with  every  member, 
that  it  was  considered  binding  in  honor  on  him,  as  well 
as  on  every  adherent  of  the  party  in  the  country  who 
did  not  care  to  incur  the  reproach  of  political  heresy  or 
apostasy.  Under  cover  of  these  notions  there  arose  in 
the  American  electorate  the  convention,  and  with  it 
came  the  fatal  dogma  of  regular  candidatures,  adopted 
in  the  party  councils,  which  alone  were  considered  to 
possess  the  right  to  court  the  popular  suffrage.  What- 
ever good  this  dogma  may  have  wrought,  its  evils  lie  bare 
on  all  sides  as  will  be  seen  later. 

The  congTcssional  caucus,  representing  as  it  did  the 
supreme  interests  of  the  party  in  power,  was  able  to 
concentrate  all  its  forces  in  the  great  fights  for  the  presi- 
dency, both  by  resort  to  intimidation  and  the  suppres- 
sion of  factions,  and  through  the  electoral  method 
adopted  by  most  of  the  States  to  insure  their  political 


14  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

integTity,  under  whieli  presidential  electors  were  elected 
upon  a  general  ticket. 

But  tke  advantage  offered  by  the  general  ticket, — the 
maintenance  of  the  sovereign  individuality  of  the  State 
and  of  the  supremacy  of  the  party,  could  only  be  se- 
cured on  condition  that  a  single  list  of  candidates  for 
electors,  was  regularly  put  into  shape  somewhere  on  be- 
half of  the  people  who  were  to  vote  for  it ;  otherwise  the 
desired  concentration  could  never  be  carried  out  over 
the  whole  State.  Tliis  being  so,  the  congressional  cau- 
cus, and  its  local  agencies  led  by  members  of  both 
houses  in  the  States,  had  only  to  come  forward  and  pre- 
pare the  lists  which  tlie  people  would  accept  and  duti- 
fully vote  upon.  The  general  ticket  called  for  the  cau- 
cus, the  caucus  smoothed  the  way  for  the  general  ticket, 
and  each  made  over  to  the  other  that  sacred  right  of  the 
people — the  full  and  independent  exercise  of  the  elect- 
oral franchise.  While  the  general  ticket  claimed  to 
prevent  the  "consolidation"  of  the  States,  the  legislative 
caucus  consolidated  in  each  State,  power  in  the  hands  of 
a  few.  The  former  was  said  to  justify  the  latter. 
Moreover  a  dissentient  presidential  elector  having  no 
chance  of  being  returned  under  the  general  ticket,  the 
"imperative  mandate"  became  logically  and  almost 
spontaneously  the  rule  for  cho  electors,  to  the  advan- 
tage of  the  candidates  adopted  by  the  congressional 
caucus.  Thus  in  the  first  and  in  the  second  instance, 
voters  and  electors  both  abdicated  their  independence.^ 
The  voters  had  bjen  reduced  to  mere  machines  and  cast 
their  ballots  for  electors  who  had  already  been  chosen 
in  legislative  caucuses,  while  these  electors  in  turn  were 

•  Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  205. 


Its  Origin.  15 

mere  machines  and  cast  their  votes  for  a  President  and 
Vice-President  who  had  already  been  selected  by  a  con- 
gressional caucus. 

It  is  but  natural  that  the  malpractices  of  leaders  of 
caucuses  resulting  from  such  conditions,  should  soon 
cause  a  revolt  in  the  public  conscience.  Protests  in- 
creased from  year  to  year.  The  tide  of  democracy 
which  had  swept  in  with  Jefferson  continued  tx>  rise. 
The  era  of  good  feeling  dawned  and  passed.  Popular 
clamor  grew  louder.  Statesmen  and  politicians  felt 
that  soon  the  system  must  give  way  to  the  people.  Public 
meetings  almost  without  exception  condemned  the  nom- 
inations made  by  the  caucus  as  a  flagrant  usurpation  of 
the  rights  of  the  people.  State  legislatures  began  to 
oppose  it.  Tammany  alone  stood  firm.  The  end  finally 
came  in  a  three^day  debate  in  Congress,  when  the  Senate, 
wearied  out,  adjourned  the  discussion  sine  die.  The 
congressional  caucus  was  doomed.  The  people  had  won 
a  decisive  battle.    King  Caucus  was  dethroned. 

But  the  tide  of  democracy  was  not  to  be  staid.  It 
swept  on  into  the  States.  The  legislative  caucuses 
which  had  already  been  broken  into  in  some  cases  be- 
fore the  burst  of  democratic  feeling  during  the  third 
decade  of  the  nineteenth  century  because  of  their  non- 
representative  character,  since  all  districts  of  a  State 
in  which  the  party  was  in  a  minority  were  left  unrep- 
resented, were  now  to  receive  a  final  blow  which  was  to 
leave  them  in  utter  collapse. 

As  a  result  of  this  movement  there  appeared  in  1817 
a  new  variation  of  our  nominating  machinery  known  as 
a  "mixed  convention,"  which  was  a  popular  convention 
of  dcle2:ates  from  the  counties  in  which  the  members  of 


16  Caucus  and  Convention  System, 

the  legislature  were  to  sit  only  in  tlie  absence  of  special 
envoys  or  delegates  from  tlieir  county. -^  This  plan  of 
convention  gave  a  definite  and  permanent  form  in  party 
government  to  the  principle  and  the  practice  of  an  au- 
thority delegated  by  the  people  to  a  popular  convention, 
the  haphazard  antecedents  of  which  we  have  seen  rise 
at  the  da^va  of  the  American  Republic,  in  the  confer- 
ence and  correspondence  committees,  and  in  the  spo- 
radic conventions  of  state  delegates. 

In  spite  of  the  strong  popular  movement  the  legis- 
lative caucuses  disappeared  but  slowly.  In  Massachu- 
setts special  delegates  were  not  added  to  the  legislative 
caucus  until  1823,  while  in  New  York  as  late  as  1821 
the  legislative  caucus  remained  practically  uninfluenced 
by  popularly  chosen  delegates.  This  indicates  in  a  very 
concrete  way  how  great  an  influence  the  caucuses  pos- 
sessed over  the  minds  of  the  people,  how  strong  the  force 
of  habit  of  having  men  nominated  for  them,  how  irre- 
sistible the  prestige  of  leadership. 

For  these  same  reasons  it  was  that  in  spite  of  the  great 
popular  upheaval,  the  congressional  caucus  was  able  to 
hold  its  owTi  for  no  less  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  and 
wielded  its  oligarchical  power,  with  the  aid  of  a  few 
small  gi'oups  of  men  scattered  throughout  the  Union. 
But  if  democratic  feeling  did  not  at  once  become  an 
in'esistible  force,  if  it  did  not  advance  by  leaps  and 
bounds,  it  none  the  less  accumulated  slowly  in  the  mind 
of  the  Nation  by  a  daily  and  hourly  process,  while  within 
the  States,  the  legislative  caucus  giving  birth  to  the 
mixed  convention,  was  itself  paving  the  way  for  a  new 
era  when  the  people  should  once  more  nominate. 

>  Amer.  Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  278. 


Its  Origin.  17 

Tliongli  tlie  congressional  and  legislative  cauciisea 
were  wiped  out,  their  poison  was  to  remain  to  vitiate 
American  politics  from  then  on.  Their  gi'eat  pres- 
tige, as  being  composed  of  members  of  the  higliest  legis- 
lative bodies  of  the  land,  had  given  their  decisions  a 
high  moral  sanction,  and  had  won  for  their  nominees 
great  r^pect.  The  notion  of  party  regularity  had  grown 
upon  the  people,  and  with  it  the  mental  habit  of  peace- 
ably abiding  by  the  wishes  of  the  caucuses.  There  wag 
implanted  in  them  a  deep  respect  for  party  conven- 
tionalism, for  its  external  badge,  and  they  were  drilled 
into  a  blind  acceptance  of  "regular  nominations." 

This  legacy — "the  charm  of  regular  nominations" 
which  mysteriously  holds  voters  to  the  machine  that 
manufactures  candidates  and  leads  them  to  cast  their 
ballots  as  its  slave,  without  question  as  to  who  is  repre- 
sented, or  how  it  is  done,  was  bequeathed  to  us  by  the 
non-representative  caucus.  This  idea  which  is  so  firmly 
implanted  in  the  American  mind,  is  proving  one  of  the 
greatest  difficulties  in  the  way  of  modem  primary  re- 
form. Now,  as  then,  the  struggle  is  against  an  absolute, 
non-representative  body — the  "machine-controlled"  cau- 
cus and  convention,  and  the  same  "charm  of  regular 
nominations"  stands  in  the  way,  holding  the  voter  with 
irresistible  power,  and  blinding  him  into  a  full  accept- 
ance of  corrupt  leadership. 

The  do^vmfall  of  the  congressional  and  legislative  cau- 
cuses marks  the  period  of  transition  to  our  modem  con- 
vention system.  The  mixed  state  convention  already 
spoken  of  plainly  contained  the  germs  of  this  system 
which  is  composed  purely  of  popularly  elected  delegates. 
All  that  was  necessary  was  that  the  local  caucuses  for 

a 


18  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

districts  which  had  memhers  in  the  legislature  should 
claim  the  same  privilege  of  choosing  their  own  repre- 
sentatives to  the  state  legislative  caucus,  as  that  which 
had  already  been  conceded  to  districts  without  repre- 
sentation in  the  legislative  caucus.  This  was  soon 
achieved.  As  early  as  1823  the  first  state  convention, 
composed  entirely  of  popular  delegates  elected  hy  the 
people,  was  held  in  Philadelphia;  and  by  1832  legis- 
lative caucuses  as  nominating  bodies  had  practically 
ceased  to  be. 

The  change  was  complete  and  significant.  A  thor- 
oughly representative  nominating  machinery  had 
evolved.  In  the  localities  caucuses  and  conventions  of 
a  popular  stamp  had  already  sprung  up.  Hence,  the 
creation  of  a  popularly  elected  state  convention  marked 
the  perfection  within  each  State  of  a  purely  representa- 
tive nominating  system  which  served  to  give  unity  to  the 
various  local  conventions  and  was  far  enough  removed 
from  the  individual  to  give  its  decisions  great  authority, 
and  to  give  the  seal  of  "regularity"  to  the  local  bodies 
whose  representatives  it  should  admit,  thereby  trans- 
forming the  independent  local  nominating  institutions 
into  the  lesser  organs  of  a  securely  bound  system. 

The  organization  and  the  working  of  this  system  is  as 
interesting  as  it  is  intricate.  At  the  basis  lies  the 
primary  as  the  unit  of  organization.  It  has  three  duties : 
to  select  local  candidates,  local  committee-men,  and  dele- 
gates to  conventions.  It  is  composed  of  all  the  party 
voters  who  attend  upon  its  meetings,  resident  within  the 
bounds  of  the  to^vn,  ward,  or  county,  whichever  may  be 
the  local  political  unit.  The  delegates  selected  meet  in 
a  nominating  convention,  choose  candidates  or  select  del- 


Its  Oingin.  19 

egates  to  still  higher  conventions,  as  in  the  case  of  our 
national  convention  in  which  no  primary  is  directly  rep- 
resented. 

"A  primary,  of  course,  sends  delegates  to  a  number  of 
diflFerent  conventions,  because  its  area,  let  us  say  the 
township  or  ward,  is  included  in  a  number  of  different 
election  districts,  each  of  which  has  its  own  convention. 
Thus  the  same  primary  will  in  a  city  choose  delegates  to 
at  least  the  following  conventions,  and  probably  to  one  or 
two  others :  (a)  To  the  city  convention,  which  nominates 
the  mayor  and  other  city  officers;  (b)  to  the  assembly 
district  convention,  which  nominates  candidates  for  the 
lower  house  of  the  state  legislature;  (c)  to  the  senatorial 
district  convention,  which  nominates  candidates  for  tho 
state  senate;  (d)  to  the  congressional  district  conven- 
tion, which  nominates  candidates  for  congress;  (e)  to 
the  state  convention,  which  nominates  candidates  for  the 
governorship  and  other  state  offices."  ^  In  addition  to 
this  there  may  also  be  a  county  convention  for  county 
offices,  and  a  judicial  district  convention  for  judge- 
ships. This  general  plan  of  organization  is  adhered  to 
in  the  different  States,  although  there  is  no  complete  uni- 
formitv. 

We  may  now  trace  the  operation  of  this  complex  nom- 
inating machinery.  Business  begins  in  the  primary 
which  is  summoned  by  the  local  party  managing  com- 
mittee or  some  other  prescribed  authority,  either  under 
the  rules  and  by-laws  of  the  party,  or  under  statutory 
law,  where  caucus  or  primary  laws  have  been  enacted. 
Where  local  officers  are  to  be  nominated,  names  are  sub- 
mitted and  either  accepted  unanimously  or  upon  major- 

'  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  H,  p.  85. 


20  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

ity  vote.  If  delegates  are  to  be  selected  tlie  local  com- 
mittee usually  has  a  list  of  names  prepared  beforehand, 
althongh  any  voter  present  may  bring  forward  otlier 
names.  The  list  of  delegates  chosen  is  signed  by  the 
chairman  of  the  primary,  who  then  adjonms  the  meeting 
sine  die,  nnless  party  committeemen  are  also  to  be 
chosen. 

Some  time  after  the  selection  of  the  delegates  the 
managing  committee  for  the  district  in  which  they  act, 
calls  a  convention.    The  time  which  elapses  varies  from 
a  few  davs  to  about  four  months  in  case  of  the  national 
convention.     Organization  is  effected  through  the  pro- 
posal of  a  temporary  chairman  by  the  party  managing 
committee,  or  by  some  delegate  deputed  by  the  commit- 
tee, who  calls  the  meeting  to  order  and  names  a  "Com- 
mittee on  Credentials"  which  forthwith  examines  the 
credentials  presented  by  the  delegates  from  the  primar- 
ies, and  admits  those  whom  it  deems  duly  accredited.    A 
permanent  chairman  is  then  chosen  and  the  convention 
is  organized  and  ready  for  business.     Upon  a  pre-ar- 
ranged plan  of  the  managing  committee,  those  who  are  to 
come  up  for  nomination  are  usually  fixed  beforehand,  al- 
though any  delegate  may  propose  any  person  he  sees  fit 
and  carry  him  on  the  required  majority  vote  if  he  can. 
The  convention  sometimes,  but  not  always,  also  amuses 
itself  by  passing  resolutions  expressive  of  its  political 
sentiments ;  or  if  it  is  a  state  convention  or  a  national 
convention,  it  adopts  a  platform,  touching  on,  rather 
than  dealing  with,  the  main  questions  of  the  day.    Hav- 
ing done  its  work  the  convention  adjourns  sine  die,  leav- 
ing other  election  affairs  to  be  attended  to  by  the  com- 
m.ittee. 


Its  Origin.  21 

The  complexity  of  (liis  nominating  macliinery  is  ex- 
treme. There  are  many  primaries  to  be  held,  many  del- 
egates to  be  selected  and  instructed,  many  conventions  to 
be  called,  and  many  candidates  to  be  nominated.  All 
this  requires  much  time,  much  money,  and  many  men 
willing  to  act  as  delegates,  and  many  duties  to  be  per- 
formed by  the  voters  at  the  primaries.  The  perfect 
theory  of  representation  upon  which  it  is  based  is  unfor- 
tunately worked  out  in  a  ponderous,  complicated  struct- 
ure which  tends  to  defeat  the  purpose  for  which  it  was 
created. 

REFERENCES. 

Becker,  Carl  T.    National  Nominating  Convention.    Thesis  Uni- 
versity of  Wisconsin.     1896. 
Dallixger,  F.  W.    Nominations  to  Elective  Office.    Part  I.    1897. 
Eaton,  Dorman  B,     Primary  Elections.     Amer.  Cycl.  of  Pol.  Sci., 

Vol.  IIL 
Hart,  Albert  B.    Essays  on  Government.    1893. 
Johnson,  Alexander.    Nominating  Conventions.     Amer.  CycL 

of  Pol.  Sci.,  Vol.  IL 
Julian,  G.  W.    First  Republican  National  Convention,     Amer. 

Hist.  Rev,  Vol.  IV,  p.  312.     1899. 
Lawton,  George.    The  American  Caucus  System.    1885. 
MmLER,  F.  H.    Nominating  Conventions  in  Pennsylvania,    Thesis 

University  of  Wisconsin.     1894. 
MuRDOCK,  J.  S.    First  National  Nominating  Convention.    Amer. 

Hist.  Rev.,  Vol.  I,  p.  688.    1896. 
Ostrogoiski,  M.    Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Nominating  Caucus.    Amer. 

Hist,  Rev.,  Vol  V,  p.  253.     1900. 
Whitridge,  F.  W.    Caucus  System.    Amer.  Cycl.  of  PoL  ScL, 

Vol  I,  p.  357. 


CHAPTER  II. 

POLITICAL  COMBINATIONS,  THEIR  NATURE  AND 
THEIR  CAUSE. 

It  has  been  seen  that  our  caucuses  and  conventions 
form  a  complete  and  intricate  system  which  is  sound  in 
theory.  It  admits  of  the  representation  of  every  local- 
ity, and  of  every  voter  in  that  locality,  in  the  nomination 
of  the  elective  officers  of  the  government.  In  practice, 
it  has  proved  since  its  adoption,  more  or  less  unsatis- 
factory. At  the  root  of  the  matter  lies  the  complexity  of 
the  system,  which  under  modern  conditions  of  social, 
economical,  and  political  life,  presents  an  almost  ideal 
soil  for  intrigue  and  corruption.  To  this  must  be  added 
as  a  cause  of  the  increasingly  difficult  operation  of  the 
system  the  continuous  increase  in  the  number  of  offices 
to  be  filled  under  it.  The  first  shortcoming  is  a  defect  in 
the  machinery ;  the  second  results  from  the  work  it  has 
to  do.  Both  defeat  the  ends  of  the  system,  and  nurse  the 
life  of  political  combinations  and  political  corruption. 

It  is  necessary  to  look  into  the  cause  of  the  develop- 
ment of  political  combinations,  and  of  corrupt  political 
leadership,  as  well  as  into  their  present  position,  in  order 
to  understand  the  reason  for  the  unrelenting  war  for 
primary  reform  that  is  now  being  waged  against  these 
"political  monsters." 

It  is  a  notorious  fact  that  "one-man-power  in  politics" 
and  its  accompanying  abuse  and  corruption,  is  fast  grow- 
ing stronger.  Our  caucus  and  convention  system,  once 
the  servant  of  a  sturdy  democracy,  now  in  general  prac- 


Political  Combinations,  Nature  and  Cause.      23 

tice,  remains  its  exacting  master,  the  relations  reversed 
in  fact,  and  the  original  forms  but  a  mask  for  selfish 
centralized  control.^  Why  the  change?  An  answer 
that  strikes  as  a  blow  from  the  shoulder  will  undoubtedly 
dissipate  numerous  ideas  as  to  the  purification  of  our 
nominating  system.  It  is  not  well  to  grow  pessimistic, 
but  many  methods  which  have  been  suggested,  it  seems, 
would  helplessly  miss  their  mark  because  of  a  neglect  to 
reckon  with  the  practical  conditions  of  politics  as  they 
confront  us  to-day.  iMany  earnest  reformers  find  in  the 
evolution  of  the  "machine,"  and  in  its  rapid  and  unre- 
strained growth  in  this  age  of  industrial  development,  a 
suggestion  of  the  necessity  of  a  complete  reorganization 
of  our  nominating  institutions  to  fit  modem  conditions 
more  closely,  and  they  hope  to  accomplish  this  through 
the  institution  of  what  is  kno^n  as  the  "direct  vote  sys- 
tem" of  nomination. 

The  position  of  the  political  combination  is  powerful 
and  involved.  Its  strength  lies  in  the  complex  condi- 
tions of  politics  which  have  made  it  possible.  Like  a 
weed  it  springs  up  almost  spontaneously  wherever  it 
finds  a  nourishing  soil.  In  a  sparse  population  where 
few  officers  are  elected,  where  salaries  are  small,  and  the 
affairs  of  government  simple  and  transparent,  political 
abuses  rarely  develop,  and  the  complex  nominating  ma- 
chinery works  at  no  special  disadvantage.  This  is  well 
illustrated  in  most  rural  districts,  where  the  gains  to  be 
derived  from  the  control  of  caucuses  and  conventions 
and  the  coercion  of  officials  are  too  small  to  encourage 
political  manipulators  in  building  up  a  political  busi- 
ness.   Hence  it  was,  also,  that  during  the  early  years  of 

•  Hofer,  American  Primary  System,  p.  15.    1896, 


2i  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

its  existence  our  nominating  system  worked  fairly  well, 
proving  ■unsuccessful  only  here  and  there  where  the  pop- 
ulation had  already  been  considerably  concentrated  in 
cities. 

But  with  the  enormous  increase  in  population  and 
wealth,  which  this  country  has  witnessed ;  with  the 
gro^svth  of  cities,  and  the  extension  of  interests,  the  de- 
fects of  our  nominating  machinery  have  become  more  ap- 
parent, and  have  developed  into  positive  evils  fraught 
with  real  danger  to  the  spirit  of  republican  government. 
The  complexity  of  life  and  the  complication  of  activities, 
which  this  development  produced,  created  a  need  for  a 
more  elaborate  and  thorough  administration  of  govern- 
ment. The  extension  of  governmental  activity  meant  the 
creation  of  new  offices,  which  multiplied  at  a  rapid  rate, 
and  required  the  nomination  of  an  increasing  number  of 
officials,  who  through  some  means  or  other,  and  by  some 
body  or  other,  had  to  be  selected  from  the  common  mass, 
and  brought  before  the  people  as  qualified  for  the  public 
service.  This  growing  burden  fell  too  heavily  upon  our 
nominating  system. 

With  the  tremendous  industrial  development  which 
to-day  is  astonishing  the  world  that  produces  it,  other 
changes  also  swept  in.  Such  hasty  and  abnormal  growth 
carries  with  it  a  large  unsettled  population  which  fluct- 
uates with  the  changing  seasons.  In  this  moving  mass 
no  lasting  local  ties  are  formed ;  no  general  acquaintance 
made ;  no  local  enthusiasm,  or  patriotism  inspired ;  and 
no  public  interest  aroused.  Such  a  population  of  tran- 
sient, readily-swayed,  and  often  ignorant  voters,  falls  an 
easy  and  too  willing  prey  to  the  political  worker  and  the 
"machine"  politician^ 


Political  Combinations^  Nature  and  Cause.      25 

Moreover,  our  industrial  and  commercial  ambition 
and  success  are  absorbing  an  increasingly  large  propor- 
tion of  the  best  of  our  men  in  private  interests.  Wealth 
is  produced  as  never  before.  The  wheels  of  industry 
claim  our  greatest  men.  Commercialism  is  king  to-day. 
As  a  result,  our  modern  life  has  become  too  "strenuous," 
too  complex,  too  chary  of  men's  energies,  to  allow  every- 
body to  have  a  full  hand  in  everything.  Specialization 
is  the  key-note  of  effort.  Men  follow  one  particular  line, 
and  all  outside  receives  but  a  passing  glance,  an  occa- 
sional thought,  or  an  indifferent  effort.  To-day  we  find 
men  of  business,  of  charity,  of  education,  of  law ;  and  for 
the  same  reason  also,  men  of  politics.  All  struggle  for 
themselves  and  by  themselves.  Each  lives  out  his  life  and 
spends  his  energies  in  his  own  little  chosen  sphere.  Few 
indeed  will  be  found  who  in  the  long  run  will  put  them- 
selves to  much  trouble  for  anything  in  which  they  have 
not  a  strong  and  direct  personal  interest.  It  causes  much 
trouble  to  meddle  in  politics.  It  is  a  good  deal  of 
bother  to  make  out  a  long  list  of  candidates,  requiring, 
if  the  work  is  to  be  well  done,  an  intimate  acquaintance 
with  the  nature  of  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the 
different  offices,  and  of  those  possessed  by  the  different 
candidates,  as  well  as  a  constant  watchfulness  in  political 
movements,  for  a  competent  candidate  is  often  not  "avail- 
able." ^  It  takes  an  up-to-date  man  in  politics  to  "dis- 
cover" the  "logical  candidate,"  and  then  to  carry  him 
safely  through  a  heated  campaign. 

It  is  a  considerable  reflection  upon  the  public  spirit 
of  a  community  to  say  that  nine  men  out  of  every  ten 
will  leave  the  whole  responsibility  to  the  few  who  are 

*  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  H,  p.  100. 


26  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

peculiarly  zealous,  or  who  have  private  interests  of  their 
own  to  serve ;  and  it  does  not  require  much  consideration 
to  see  that  of  these  classes,  the  latter,  having  the  most 
powerful  inducements  for  activity,  will  be  the  most  ac- 
tive. It  is  the  "man  with  an  axe  to  grind"  who  tries  to 
manage  the  primary,  and  for  this  purpose  he  usually 
affiliates  himself  with  a  political  "machine."  It  would, 
however,  be  unjust  to  the  American  citizen  and  would 
present  a  hopeless  view  of  American  politics  to  ascribe 
the  failure  to  participate  in  caucuses  and  conventions 
entirely  to  a  want  of  public  interest  or  a  selfish  pursuit 
of  riches.  It  is  primarily  due  to  the  fact  that  under  the 
prevailing  method  the  work  has  become  complex,  the 
opportunities  for  corrupt  practices  manifold,  inviting 
shrewd  men  of  bad  character  to  engage  in  running  cau- 
cuses and  conventions  as  a  permanent  and  profitable  busi- 
ness. Control  is  always  possible  with  a  well-trained,  de- 
termined, unscrupulous,  persistent  body  though  but  a 
small  minority.  They  obscure  the  issue,  mislead  the 
unwary,  cast  suspicion  upon  the  character  of  honest  op- 
ponents, corrupt  the  frail,  tempt  the  ambitious,  intimi- 
date the  weak,  and  then  by  some  sharp  stroke  at  the 
crisis  confuse  and  stampede  the  mass.  To  successfully 
contest  with  such  men  under  such  a  system  would  re- 
quire all  of  the  time  of  many  citizens  and  much  of  the 
time  of  a  majority. 

The  tendency  towards  the  monopolization  of  politics 
by  a  few  men  is  particularly  strengthened  by  the  con- 
spicuous absence;  of  active  opposition  from  among  the 
ranks  of  the  more  educated  and  strongest  members  of 
society.  Much  has  been  said  of  late  respecting  the  de- 
plorable spirit  among  college  graduates  to  keep  aloof 


Political  Combinations,  Nature  and  Cause.      27 

from  politics,  and  to  permit  men  who  in  many  cases  hare 
received  but  a  casual  education  in  the  every-day  school 
of  life,  while  pursuing  ways  both  good  and  evil,  to  grap- 
ple with  the  great  administrative  problems  which  con- 
front us  to-day.^  This  criticism  was  probably  better 
founded  some  years  ago  than  it  is  at  the  present  time,  yet 
it  does  seem  to  possess  considerable  point  even  now.  In 
England  and  Germany,  for  example,  such  conditions  do 
not  exist.  There  the  affairs  of  state  are  largely  con- 
ducted by  men  who  received  their  training  in  the  higher 
institutions  of  learning. 

Wherein  lies  the  cause  for  this  difference  ?  Shall  the 
blame  be  laid  at  the  doors  of  our  American  colleges  ?  Do 
they  fail  to  inspire  their  students  with  high  ideals  of 
sympathy  for  their  fellows,  and  of  mutual  responsi- 
bility for  the  conduct  of  public  as  well  as  of  private  af- 
fairs ?    Do  they  neglect  one  of  their  most  important  mis- 

» In  an  interesting  article  in  The  Forum  for  Jvine,  1893,  entitled  "  College  Men 
First  Among  Successful  Citizens,"  President  Charles  F.  Thwing  shows  that  out 
of  the  15,142  of  our  most  prominent  Americans  mentioned  in  Appleton's  Cyclo- 
pedia of  American  Biography,  5,326,  or  about  one-third,  are  college  bred.  Since 
our  college-trained  men  form  but  a  relatively  small  part  of  our  total  population 
and  yet  form  one-third  of  our  men  of  fame,  he  comes  to  the  conclusion  that 
"college  men  rank  first  among  successful  citizens."  That  this  should  be  the 
case  is  evident  without  demonstration.  More  important  is  the  inquiry  as  to 
what  proportion  of  oar  famous  coUege-bred  men  have  acquired  distinction  as 
statesmen  in  the  arena  of  politics,  where  the  capable  citizen  can  perform  the 
greatest  service  to  his  country.  The  statistics  furnished  by  this  same  article 
show  that  out  of  the  15,142  famous  Americans  1,310  acquired  renown  as  states- 
men, while  but  409  of  this  number  were  statesmen  with  a  college  training. 
Hence,  only  about  one-third  of  our  most  eminent  pubUc  servants  have  come 
from  colleges.  If  statistics  were  on  hand  to  show  what  proportion  of  college 
men  conduct  the  affairs  of  government  in  the  less  conspicuous  offices  found  in 
our  local  political  units,  which  in  their  totality  are  of  immeasurably  greater  Im- 
portance, and  are  far  more  vitally  productive  of  immediate  good  or  ill  for  the 
people,  the  investigation  would  probably  show  an  unfortunate  lack  of  college- 
bred  men.  It  is  especially  in  our  municipal  administration  that  the  infusion  of 
more  college  blood  is  desirable.  Why  it  is  not  found  there  in  its  proper  propor- 
tions at  the  present  time,  does  not  appear  to  lie  so  much  with  the  reluctant 
spirit  of  the  college  man  as  with  the  repelling  and  exclusive  methods  of  mu- 
nicipal politics. 


28  Caucus  and  Convention  Si/stem. 

sions, — the  teaching  of  the  duties  of  practical  patriot- 
ism, and  the  inculcation  of  an  ambition  to  contribute 
something  for  the  purification  of  politics  ?  Some  of  our 
colleges  may  fail  to  do  so,  yet  one  cannot  help  but  think 
that  in  the  main  they  are  not  delinquent  in  this  high 
duty.  Abundant  occasions  are  offered  in  our  universities 
for  the  study  of  public  problems,  abundant  stimuli  are 
presented  to  arouse  interest  in  public  affairs.^  All  our 
great  political  reforms  find  earnest  and  enthusiastic  ad- 
vocates among  the  men  who  occupy  positions  in  our 
higher  institutions  of  learning. 

That  the  American  student  is  alive  to  the  public  ques- 
tions of  the  day,  and  is  willing  to  identify  himself  with 
the  practical  and  active  side  of  politics,  is  demonstrated 
in  many  ways  in  the  course  of  his  college  life.  It  finds 
its  expression  in  the  organization  of  political  clubs,  in 
the  holding  of  enthusiastic  partisan  rallies,  in  the  hiring 
of  political  speakers,  in  the  publication  of  partisan  col- 
lege sheets,  in  the  insertion  of  political  news  items  in  the 
college  papers,  in  the  participation  of  students  in  local 
elections.  Here  is  unmistakable  evidence  that  the  Amer- 
ican student  is  by  no  means  indifferent  to  the  affairs  of 
government. 

Must  we  not  look  elsewhere  for  an  explanation  of  the 
seeming  estrangement  of  higner  education  and  the  public 
service.  What  are  the  avenues  that  lead  to  public  life 
to-day?     Will  ambition,  coupled  with  scholarship  and 

>  Yale,  rather  than  Harvard  with  her  literary  pre-eminence,  probably  fur- 
nishes the  spirit  of  what  must  continue  to  be  the  typical  American  college,  says 
Prof.  George  Santayama  of  Harvard  University.  She  is  the  mother  of  men, 
rather  than  a  school  of  doctors.  "The  Yale  principle  is  the  English  principle 
and  the  only  right  one.  ...  No  wonder  that  all  America  loves  Yale,  where 
American  traditions  are  vigorous,  American  instincts  are  unchecked,  and  young 
uien  are  trained  and  made  eager  for  the  keen  struggles  of  American  life." 


Political  Combinations^  Nature  and  Cause.      29 

capacity,  take  the  college  graduate  into  tlie  clierislied 
service  of  his  country  ?  Nine  times  out  of  ten  the  an- 
swer is  probably  no.  He  needs  another  and  indispens- 
able equipment  in  the  form  of  a  "pull"  or  "stand  in" 
with  the  professional  politicians  who  arbitrarily  control 
the  portals  which  lead  to  the  country's  service.  If,  per- 
chance, he  possesses  their  good  will,  he  must  either  act- 
ively or  passively  connect  himself  with  disreputable* 
methods  of  politics,  and  must  associate  with  the 
Crokers,  Quays,  and  Gormans  who  degrade  our  political 
life.  If  fortunately,  or  unfortunately,  he  lacks  their  sup- 
port, his  chances  for  the  realization  of  his  hope5  are  slim, 
and  he  is  likely  to  forego  the  expense  and  uncertainty  of 
a  struggle  for  office.  Kather  than  join  the  band  of  re- 
formers and  prove,  at  least,  his  willingness  to  fight  for 
his  rights  and  for  those  of  his  fellows,  the  American  col- 
lege graduate  seems  to  prefer  to  enter  some  more  peace- 
ful, enjoyable,  and  remunerative  occupation,  free  from 
the  painful  severity  of  the  reformer's  life  and  relieved 
by  more  than  an  occasional  reward  of  discouraging  pro- 
portions. 

"Why  wonder,  therefore,  that  our  institutions  of 
higher  education  do  not  contribute  to  the  stream  of  pub- 
lic life  as  they  do  in  England  or  Germany.  The  diffi- 
culty lies  not  so  much  with  the  American  collegian  as 
with  American  methods  of  politics.  In  England  and 
Germany,  a  thoroughly  reformed  and  fairly  remunera- 
tive civil  service,  and  a  generally  high  political  morality, 
makes  the  course  to  the  public  service  honorable  and  dig- 
nified and  open  to  all  alike  who  possess  the  ability  to  pass 
the  examinations,  or  who  have  demonstrated  their  right 
to  promotion  through  efficient  work.     There  is  no  rea- 


30  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

son  to  believe  that  if  tlie  college  graduate  of  America 
•were  given  as  free  an  opportunity  to  enter  tlie  public 
service  as  is  enjoyed  by  the  German  or  English  student, 
that  he  would  not  be  as  ready,  or  more  so,  to  take  ad- 
vantage of  it 

What  we  need  to-day,  therefore,  is  more  reform, — ^the 
reform  of  our  nominating  institutions,  which  will  re- 
store to  the  people  an  effective  vote,  and  through  this  the 
reform  of  our  civil  service.  Eef orm  can  only  be  accom- 
plished through  the  co-operation  of  all  who  stand  for  the 
high  and  noble  in  society,  as  was  so  well  demonstrated  in 
the  recent  struggle  in  New  York.  The  college  graduate 
must  be  a  leader  in  this  movement.  If  he  contents  him- 
self with  an  occasional  newspaper  or  magajzine  article 
urging  reform,  with  a  yearly  platform  oration  denounc- 
ing Tammany  politics,  with  a  private  shrug  and  shudder 
over  the  daily  paper  in  the  peace  of  his  home,  how  can  he 
expect  his  simpler  brother  with  poverty-stricken  mind 
and  hand  to  come  forward  on  election  day  in  the  cause 
of  better  government?  The  college  man's  apathy  to- 
wards wrongful  politics,  his  passiveness  in  reform,  are  a 
source  of  great  strength  to  political  combinations  at  the 
present  time. 

In  conclusion,  then,  modem  politics  has  grown  too 
complex,  its  demands  too  m  my,  to  enable  the  business  of 
politics  to  be  done  incidentally  by  the  voters  while  they 
foUow  their  trades  or  their  professions.  There  are  too 
many  offices  to  be  filled ;  too  many  committees  to  be  ap- 
pointed; too  mrny  candidates  to  be  selected;  too  many 
meetings  to  be  called.  All  this  must  be  attended  to  by  a 
special  class  of  specially  interested  men,  who  expect  re- 
ward for  their  efforts  at  the  hands  of  the  public.    Hence, 


Political  Comlinations,  Nature  and  Cause.      31 

as  long  as  our  caucus  and  convention  system  exists  there 
will  also  exist  a  class  of  politicians  who  control  its  opera- 
tions. 

The  cures  proposed  for  this  evil  are  many;  those  tried 
fewer ;  those  wholly  successful  nona  If,  as  is  so  gener- 
ally conceded,  complexity  lies  at  the  bottom  of  it  all, 
then  why  not  simplify  the  system  ?  Why  not  redistribute 
the  work  of  nomination  among  other,  and  more  proper 
hands?  Why  not  abolish  the  complex  machinery  en- 
tirely, and  substitute  a  simple  one,  thereby  dispensing 
with  some  of  our  professional  politicians?  The  direct 
primary  has  been  proposed  since  it  is  based  upon  simple 
principles  incorporated  in  a  simple  system,  thus  avoid- 
ing the  difficulties  of  our  present  nominating  machinery. 
Its  opponents  declare  it  a  failure.  How  far  this  is  true 
remains  to  be  seen. 

Whichever  way  we  look  at  it,  a  remedy  to  be  success- 
ful must  possess,  as  its  cardinal  virtue,  simplicity.  If  in 
our  laws  of  to-day  the  voices  of  only  a  few  men  control, 
if  our  public  servants  are  the  choice  of  only  a  few 
"bosses,"  then  we  must  find  a  simpler,  safer,  and  shorter 
way  to  our  legislative  halls,  and  to  our  public  adminis- 
tration,— one  which  will  make  every  man  feel  that  there 
is  nothing  which  will  drown  his  voice,  or  defeat  his  will, 
and  which  will  hold  out  the  reward  of  an  absolutely  cer- 
tain vote  to  him  who  enters  a  booth  on  election  day  and 
casts  a  thoughtful  ballot. 

Such  a  change  would  make  government  the  business 
of  every  man,  and  would  be  most  likely  to  effect  a  cure. 
For  while  there  would  still  exist  political  leadership  and 
political  organization,  each  would  act  in  its  proper 
sphere.    They  would  no  longer  be  self -constituted.    The 


32  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

leader  would  no  longer  be  the  political  monster  wlio 
throttles  opposition  and  mles  by  his  own  will.  The  or- 
ganization would  no  more  be  the  modern  political  "ma- 
chine,"— the  "American.  Juggernaut,"  managed,  gov- 
erned, and  controlled  by  a  few  self-chosen,  cunning, 
scheming,  and  ambitious  politicians,  masters  of  political 
chicanery  for  what  influence,  power,  glory,  and  money 
they  may  be  able  to  extract  from  official  positions.  Both 
would  be  the  chosen  instrumentalities  of  the  people,  and 
would  exist  as  indispensable  mechanisms  in  our  political 
system.  We  must  aim  at  their  transformation  from  in- 
struments of  the  few,  and  for  the  few,  to  instruments  of 
the  many,  and  for  all.  The  leader  shall  not  choose  him- 
self, but  shall  be  the  choice  of  all.  Political  organiza- 
tions shall  not  only  serve  somebody,  but  everybody. 
When  this  shall  have  been  consummated,  reform  will  be 
complete,  for  the  public  official  now  master  of  the  people 
will  then  have  become  the  public  servant. 

REFERENCES. 

Abbot,  Lyman.    The  Machine.    Outlook,  June  15,  1901,  p.  396. 
Bryce,  James.     American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  II,  pp.  60,  68,  88, 

89,  107-129.     1889. 
Dallinger,  Frederick  W.   Nominations  to  Elective  Office.   1897. 
George,  Henry.    Money  in  Elections.    North  Amer.  Rev.,  March, 

1883,  p.  201. 
GODKIN,  E.  L.    Criminal  Politics.    North  Amer.  Rev.,  June,  1890, 

p.  706. 
HOFER,  E.     The  American  Primary  System.     1896. 
IviNS,  Wm.  B.     Electoral  Reforni. 
IviNS,  Wm.  B.    Maohine  Politics  and  Money  in  Elections  in  New 

York  City. 
Roosevelt,  Theodore.    Machine  Politics  in  New  York  City. 

Century,  November,  1886. 


Political  CumhinationSj  Nature  and  Cause.      33 

Roosevelt,  Theodore.    American   Ideals   and  Other   Essays, 

Chapter  VI.     1897. 
Whitridqe,  F.  W.    Assessments.     Amer.  Cycl.  of  PoL  Sci.,  Vol  L 

Growth  of  Machine  Power.    Nation,  September  6,  1900, 

p.  183. 

Bossism.    Outlook,  January  16,  1897,  p.  226. 

Money  in  Election.    Outlook,  June  16,  1897,  p.  227. 

Machine  Candidates.    Outlook,  January,  1897,  p.  155, 

3 


CHAPTEK  III. 

THE  CORRUPT  CAUCUS  OF  TO-DAY. 

It  is  hoped  that  from  the  preceding  general  discua- 
sion  of  the  main  causes  which  underlie  the  development 
of  political  combinations,  it  is  clear  why  modem  politics 
is  distinctly  a  field  of  business,  engaged  in  by  profes- 
sional politicians  seeking  power  and  profit,  and  why  our 
convention  system  no  longer  subserves  its  original  pur- 
pose 35  a  means  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  by  a 
delegated  popular  choice,  but  has  been  reduced  to  a  polit- 
ical mill,  trod  by  the  helpless  voter,  and  grinding  out  a 
candidate  whenever  the  political  manipulator  sets  it  in 
motion.  The  first  step  in  this  process  is  initiated  in  the 
caucus  or  primary,  but  before  proceeding  with  the  dis- 
cussion, it  may  be  well  to  consider  the  different  terms 
used  in  connection  with  this  institution,  and  to  see  what 
position  it  occupies  in  our  political  system. 

By  the  term  "caucus"  was  meant,  primarily,  a  private 
meeting  of  voters,  holding  similar  views,  assembled  prior 
to  an  election  for  the  purpose  of  furthering  such  views 
at  the  election.  With  the  development  of  parties,  and 
the  rule  of  majorities,  the  caucus,  or  some  equivalent,  be- 
came an  indispensable  adiunct  of  party  government,  and 
it  may  now  be  defined  as  a  meeting  of  members  belong- 
ing to  the  same  party  in  any  political  or  legislative  body, 
held  preliminary  to  certain  legislative  action,  for  the 
purpose  of  selecting  candidates  to  be  voted  for,  or  for  the 
purpose  of  determining  the  course  of  the  party  in  some 
legislative  proceeding.  In  our  ordinary  political  vocabu- 
lary the  term  "caucus"  is  used  in  an  even  more  restricted 


The  Corrujpi  Caucus  of  To-day.  35 

sense,  being  confined  to  meetings  of  local  party  commit- 
tee-men, either  directly  or  indirectly,  through  delegates.^ 
The  term  "primary"  or  "primary  election"  is  also  used 
interchangeably  with  "caucus,"  although  it  is  fast  sup- 
planting the  latter  in  certain  parts  of  the  country.  In 
country  districts,  generally,  excepting  in  counties  and 
States  where  some  form  of  direct  primary  election  is 
held,  the  term  "caucus"  is  still  quite  generally  used.  In 
cities  the  increase  of  the  safeguards  which  have  been 
found  necessary  in  the  attempt  to  secure  better  protec- 
tion of  the  caucus,  have  surrounded  it  with  so  many 
formalities  that  it  is  rapidly  becoming  known  as  the 
primary  or  preliminary  election.^  Our  caucus  or  pri- 
mary system,  as  already  indicated,  therefore  lies,  theo- 
retically, at  the  basis  of  a  complete  electoral  system  which 
has  grown  up  within  each  party  independent  of  statutory 
enactment,  and  side  by  side  with  the  subsequent  proceed- 
ings which  are  provided  in  the  general  eleetion  laws  and 
are  given  a  complete  legal  setting  through  the  enactment 
of  the  Australian  ballot  legislation.^ 

The  degeneration  of  the  caucus,  so  marked  in  recent 
years,  has  resulted  in  a  reform  movement  for  legisla- 
tion through  the  application  of  the  main  principles  of 
the  Australian  ballot  system,  and  the  expansion  of  its 
functions,  by  granting  to  the  individual  members  of  each 
party  the  pri^'ileges  of  a  direct  exercise  of  the  power  of 
nomination  for  all  elective  offices.  To  this  movement  the 
most  important  chapters  of  this  treatise  will  be  devoted. 
Before  entering  upon  its  discussion  it  is  necessary,  how- 

'  Lalor,  Amer.  Cyclopedia  of  Pol.  Science,  Vol.  I,  p.  360. 

»Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  .356. 

•  Wigmore,  Australian  Ballot  System.    Introduction.    1689, 


36  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

ever,  to  look  into  the  position  of  tlie  modern  caucus  or 
primary  and  to  study  its  relation  to  tlie  forces  which 
are  operating  in  modem  politics  for  good  and  for  evil. 

Nowhere  is  the  professional  politician  more  active 
than  in  the  caucus,  for  when  success  comes  here  it  is 
absoluta  It  is  in  the  caucus  alone  that  he  comes  directly 
in  contact  with  the  voter.  Should  he  fail  here,  to  i>er- 
suade  or  deceive  the  voter  into  a  support  of  his  candi- 
dates, he  can  only  direct  his  energies  and  efforts  for 
political  manipulation  to  the  subversion  of  the  delegated 
authority  of  the  voter  before  it  is  exercised  in  the  con- 
vention. Should  he  succeed  in  the  caucus  all  is  gained, 
for  the  delegate  will  from  then  on  be  his,  and  generally 
will  stand  firmly  for  the  candidates  presented  by  him. 

Since  the  primary  or  caucus  is  the  most  fundamental 
unit  of  our  political  system,  it  is  also  the  most  important. 
It  is  here  that  the  first  step  in  the  process  of  election  is 
inaugurated.  It  is  here  that  the  preliminaries  of  nom- 
ination are  opened.  It  is  the  source  of  the  spring  that 
leads  to  public  sendee.  If  the  source  is  impure,  it  will 
corrupt  all  the  waters  that  mingle  with  its  onward- 
coursing  stream.  The  delegates  of  a  corinipt  caucus  or 
primary  carry  their  wrongful  influence  into  every  con- 
vention in  which  they  sit,  and  whatever  safeguards 
may  be  thrown  around  the  convention,  these  delegates 
will  nevertheless  stain  its  action  as  a  representative  body, 
and  vitiate  its  true  results  as  an  exponent  of  the  peoples^ 
will. 

Hence,  if  we  wish  to  purify  our  nominating  system, 
we  must  begin  at  the  primary  or  caucus,  where  the  im- 
pure source  of  corruption  must  be  cut  off.  But  this 
alone  is  not  sufficient.     There  remains  the  convention. 


The  Corrupt  Caucus  of  To-day.  37 

Tills  institution  itself  gives  rise  to  certain  evils  which 
tend  to  defeat  representation  and  the  cause  of  good  gov- 
ernment. Hero,  as  in  the  primary  or  caucus,  funda- 
mental reform  is  necessary,  but  it  is  in  the  latter  that 
the  first  step  must  he  taken. 

If  the  preceding  is  the  order  of  reform  for  the  puri- 
fication of  our  nominating  institutions,  what  must  be  its 
nature?  That  corruption  often  despoils  our  primaries 
and  conventions  of  their  fruits  cannot  be  doubted.-^  That 
they  are  not  uniformly  corrupt  is  equally  true,  but  that 
corruption  at  some  stage  of  their  complicated  proceed- 
ing is  becoming  notoriously  prevalent  will  not  admit  of 
dispute.  Their  present  condition  is  so  serious  that  it 
may  well  arouse  the  alarm  of  thinking  men. 

The  corruption  of  the  caucus  is  not  a  thing  of  the  pres- 
ent alone.  It  did  not  fall  upon  us  as  a  sudden  curse. 
Far  back  in  our  early  history  some  of  the  same  evils 
which  surround  us  now  existed  where  the  population 
was  concentrated  and  where  wealth  abounded.  To-day 
these  conditions  are  more  widespread,  more  aggravated, 
and  more  dangerous,  because  of  the  greater  concentra- 
tion of  population,  the  greater  accumulation  of  wealth, 
and  the  participation  of  corporations  in  political  affairs 
and  legislative  proceedings. 

It  is  in  the  cities  and  manufacturing  districts  that  the 
primary  first  yields  to  corruption.  The  opportunities 
for  it  are  greatest  there.  Political  work  is  more  compli- 
cated and  mor^  controlling  in  results  than  in  small  com'- 
munities.  The  average  man  in  the  city  believes  that  it 
is  but  a  waste  of  time  to  attempt  to  cope  with  the  poli- 
tician in  the  primary  or  caucus  and  he  abandons  his 

*  Hofer,  American  Primary  System,  pp.  10-36.    1896. 


33  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

political  duties  and  surrenders  his  individual  responsi- 
bilities because  he  regards  his  personal  effort  of  so  little 
importance  in  attempting  to  overcome  so  gTeat  a  wrong. 
"Officers  are  well  paid,  the  patronage  is  large,  the  oppor- 
tunities for  jobs,  pickings,  and  even  stealings  are  enor- 
mous." ^  It  is  worth  while  for  unscrupulous  men  to  con- 
trol nominations  where  such  great  prizes  are  to  be  won. 

The  country,  on  the  other  haiid,  is  more  protected. 
There  life  is  simpler,  purer,  and  freer.  There  every 
man  is  every  other  man's  neighbor  or  friend.  Local 
offices  are  few  and  their  control  brings  with  it  little 
glory  and  gain.  For  these  and  other  reasons  the  country 
districts  have  to  a  greater  extent  than  the  cities  escaped 
corrupting  influences  in  the  control  of  their  caucuses. 
In  the  nomination  of  state,  congi^essional,  and  legislative 
candidates,  however,  the  professional  politicians  and  the 
agents  of  the  corporations  do  not  overlook  the  coimte"y 
caucuses,  and  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  means  of  com- 
munication are  more  difficult,  they  are  often  able  to  de- 
ceive and  mislead  the  voter  with  reference  to  issues  and 
candidates. 

While  the  corruption  of  the  primary  has  been  grad- 
ually increasing  with  the  growth  of  the  nation,  it  was 
indirectly  given  an  additional  impetus  through  the  in- 
stitution of  the  Australian  ballot  system.^  The  election 
without  strict  legal  regulation  had  been  a  failure.  The 
legalized  rule-regulated  election  governed  by  the  Aus- 
tralian ballot  'system  was  proving  a  success.  The  caucus 
or  primary  without  rules  was  also  proving  a  failure. 
Why  not  apply  rules  here  as  well  ?    The  process  appeared 

>  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  n,  p.  100.    1889. 
»  Review  of  Reviews,  May,  1893. 


The  Corrupt  Caucus  of  To-day  39 

simple,  rules  were  drawn,  and  there  rose  the  rule-regu- 
lated caucus.  But  this  proved  a  failure  in  the  end.  The 
reason  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  rules  were  not  prescribed 
by  the  State  as  in  the  case  of  the  Australian  ballot  sys- 
tem, to  secure  expression  of  individual  will,  but  by  the 
party  leaders  or  "bosses"  to  insure  their  own  control. 
Moreover,  it  was  found  true  that  no  rules  or  statutory- 
regulations  could  prevent  the  tampering  with  the  dele- 
gates after  they  were  chosen  in  the  caucus,  no  matter 
how  well  its  proceedings  were  regulated. 

The  system  worked  well  or  ill^  just  as  the  rules  were 
good  or  bad,  stringent  or  elastic.  The  right  of  prescrib- 
ing them  was  an  important  one,  since  they  were  to  have 
the  force  of  law.^  A  struggle  began  for  this  power.  The 
victory  generally  came  to  the  professional  politicians  or 
to  the  "machines"  within  the  parties.^  These  being  but 
human,  selfish  purposes  suggested  selfish  means.  The 
regulated  caucus  or  primary  had  already  been  amended 
into  a  "regTilar"  caiicus  or  primary,  which  alone  was 
declared  to  be  the  golden  portal  leading  to  nomination 
and  to  public  service.  The  victorious  political  leaders 
resolved  to  entrench  themselves  still  further.  "Regular- 
ity" being  already  the  open  sesame  to  nomination,  they 
decided  to  further  regulate  "regularity."  The  legiti- 
mate nominating  machine  was  in  their  hands,  and  they 
betook  themeselves  to  so  adjusting  its  working  that  only 
their  favorites  should  be  turned  out  as  candidates  for 
office.  New  rules  were  made  for  the  choice  of  primary 
election  officers ;  for  the  deteniiination  of  party  member- 
ship ;  and  for  the  time  and  place  of  meeting.    Old  rules 

'  Remsen,  Primary  Elections,  p.  35.    1894. 

'  Hofer,  Amei-ican  Pi'imary  System,  p.  57.    1896. 


40  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

were  easily  amended  or  abolished.  As  a  result  the  cau- 
cus came  to  be  conducted  by  party  "bosses" ;  controlling 
party  membership  was  reduced  to  "boss  heelers,"  and 
meetings  silently  betook  themselves  to  back  alleys  and 
up  flights  of  stairs.  Thus  it  came  to  be  that  the  primary, 
especially  in  our  larger  cities,  became  small,  "select," 
and  "regnilar."^  Thus  it  was,  that  this  institution, 
which  in  theory  is  the  most  democratic  of  all  our  institu- 
tions, came  to  be  the  most  undemocratic  in  practice. 

The  evolution  of  the  corrupt  caucus  or  primary  was 
the  logical  outcome  of  the  false  application  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  rule-regulation.  A  primary  election  no  less 
than  a  general  election  is  too  important  and  involved  to 
be  conducted  free  of  all  rules.  But  rules  alone  are  not 
suflBcient.  Far  more  important  is  it  to  provide  the 
proper  power  for  their  prescription.  The  rule-regu- 
lated general  election  held  under  the  Australian  svs- 
tem  was  a  success  not  only  because  it  was  legalized,  but 
because  its  rules  sprung  directly  from  the  State.  The 
rule-regulated  primary  was  a  failure,  in  part  at  least, 
because  it  also  was  legalized,  while  the  rules  which  were 
clothed  with  the  force  of  law  as  a  result  of  this  legali- 
zation, did  not  spring  from  the  State,  but  were  created 
by  the  party  and  virtually  by  the  "boss"  or  "machine" 
which  controlled  that  party  Thus  the  rules  became  a 
most  powerful  instrument  for  the  development  of  one- 
man-power  in  politics,  and  left  the  primary  a  broken  in- 
stitution. 

Those  who  to-day  resist  the  enactment  of  caucus  laws 
or  primary  laws  upon  the  ground  tliat  such  laws  are  un- 
democratic, and  an  infringement  upon  our  prided  Amer- 
ican liberties  and  upon  the  free  action  of  our  political 

'  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  U,  p.  101. 


The  Corrujpt  Caucus  of  To-day.  41 

parties,  occupy  a  mistaken  position.  If  tlie  parties  fall 
as  helpless  prey  into  the  hands  of  men  within  their  own 
ranks,  then  certainly  the  time  is  at  hand  for  a  higher 
power  to  step  in  and  rescue  the  parties  as  well  as  the  peo- 
ple from  these  ambitious  and  unscrupulous  tyrants. 

In  another  way,  also,  the  Australian  ballot  system  has 
indirectly  increased  corruption  at  the  primaries.  It  has 
turned  the  stream  of  corruptive  forces  back  from  the 
election  to  the  nomination.  Much  of  the  evil  formerly 
incidental  to  election  day  has  been  transmitted  to  the 
primaries.  The  vicious  practices,  no  longer  possible  at 
the  polls  under  the  x\ustralian  ballot  laws,  are  now  em- 
ployed in  the  caucus  and  nominating  convention  with  an 
energy  unparalleled  in  the  past. 

In  many  States  the  purification  of  the  primary  has 
been  undertaken  in  earnest,  as  is  evidenced  in  the  gen- 
eral enactment  of  primary  laws.  These  laws  vary  from 
the  most  rudimentary  beginnings,  found  mainly  in  the 
Western  States,  to  more  complicated  and  detailed  sys- 
tems, such  as  those  of  Massachusetts  and  Wisconsin. 
Much  good  has  come  from  some  of  this  legislation,  but 
very  much  more  remains  to  be  accomplished.  Exper- 
ience has  demonstrated  that  the  most  thoroughly  legal- 
ized caucuses  are  nevertheless  subject  to  corrupt  influ- 
ences. The  versatile  politician  "v^dll  ever  succeed  in  locat- 
ing a  sufiicient  number  of  loopholes  in  any  law  which 
perpetuates  and  attempts  to  regulate  caucuses  and  con- 
ventions, to  enable  him  to  manipulate  his  "wires"  suc- 
cessfully. 

The  devices  resorted  to  for  the  corruption  of  the  cau- 
cus or  primary  are  innumerable.  Among  the  most  fam- 
iliar are;  The  packing  of  caucuses;  the  organization  of 


42  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

political  ward  and  district  clubs;  springing  "snap" 
caucuses  (that  is  witli  short  notice  or  none  at  all)  ;  hold- 
ing primaries  in  out-of-the-way  or  disreputable  places; 
having  beer  in  a,  side  room  where  the  "boys"  may  be 
taken  around  for  a  promised  treat  after  the  primary; 
putting  out  lights  and  knocking  with  clubs  and  fists  in 
the  dark ;  ^  cutting  off  debate  by  resolution  and  rushing 
the  nominations ;  electing  such  inspectors  as  will  "see  to 
it"  that  the  "right  person"  is  "counted  in" ;  using  tissue 
paper  ballots ;  bolting  a  nomination  and  holding  another 
primary  or  caucus;  or  resorting  to  the  cut-and-dried 
method  of  combining  and  prearranging  the  work  and 
having  the  "slate"  for  nomination  referred  to  a  commit- 
tee appointed  by  a  chairman  put  up  by  the  "ring"  hav- 
ing the  plot  in  charge.^ 

In  this  way  a  small  band  of  "workers"  may  defeat  a 
large  majority  of  voters  who  have  no  organization.  And 
in  case  these  and  other  tricks  fail  to  accomplish  the  pur- 
pose of  the  conspirators,  they  will  bribe,  with  promise 
of  office,  employment,  or  fat  job,  or  with  cash  in  hand, 
so  many  of  the  "unfixed"  members  as  may  be  needed  to 
effect  their  purpose.  It  is  true  that  all  the  methods  hero 
enumerated  are  not  practiced  everywhere  or  every  time, 
but  it  is  a  notorious  fact  tha+  our  modem  primary  is,  in 
spite  of  numerous  attempts  at  reform,  still  the  scene  of 
much  disgraceful  political  chicanery  and  corruption. 

Here  lies  an  explanation  for  much  of  the  apathy 
shown  by  the  average  voter  towards  the  primary.  It  is 
clear  why  he  does  not  care  to  attend.  Many  a  time  he 
can  perform  no  useful  function  thera    Frequently  he  is 

»  Hofer,  American  Primary  System,  p.  34.    1896. 
'  Lalor,  Encyclopedia  of  Pol.  Sci.,  see  "  Primaries." 


The  Corrupt  Caucus  of  To-day.  43 

a  mere  puppet  which  casts  a  ballot  that  counts  for  noth- 
ing. His  definite  preference  for  a  candidate  is  nullified. 
He  has  no  choice,  no  freedom  of  individual  action,  but 
is  bound  bj  the  will  of  the  "boss"  and  "machine."  As 
a  result  he  stays  at  home.  It  is  no  particularly  interest- 
ing or  agreeable  task  to  defeat  one's  own  wishes  by 
casting  a  useless  or  misdirected  ballot  at  a  primary 
which  may  be  held  in  such  disreputable  quarters  as 
would  inspire  a  respectable  man  to  remain  away. 

This  stay-at-home  spirit  is  a  most  deplorable  one.  It 
springs  from  a  disgust  with  government.  It  is  the  fruit 
of  perverted  democracy.  In  some  cities  less  than  thirty 
per  cent,  of  the  voters  cast  a  ballot,  and  in  twenty-four 
of  the  largest  cities  barely  half  of  the  voters  go  to  the 
polls.  The  stay-at-home  vote  increased  in  Pennsylvania 
from  seventy  thousand  in  IS 8 8  to  six  hundred  and  t>en 
thousand  in  1895 ;  in  New  York  from  seventy-five  thou- 
sand to  five  hundred  and  ten  thousand ;  in  Massachusetts 
from  eighty  thousand  to  two  hundred  and  thirty  thou- 
sand ;  in  Ohio  from  forty  thousand  to  one  hundred  and 
eighty  thousand.^ 

Such  conditions  are  not  compatible  with  political  lib- 
erty and  equality.  Yet  the  accusing  cry  that  comes  from 
the  masses  is  often  weak  and  uncertain.  Generally,  a 
citizen's  interest  in  politics  is  measured  by  the  repre- 
sentation which  he  feels  he  has  in  government.  Deny 
him  a  voice  in  government  and  his  interest  ceases.  Such 
an  attitude  is  too  passive  in  tenor.  Not  only  should 
there  be  interest  where  there  is  representation,  but  there 
should  be  sufficient  interest  when  representation  is  de- 
nied to  fight  for  it,  and  to  struggle  for  the  recovery  of 

•  Pomeroy,  Eltweed,  Arena,  April,  1897. 


4i  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

the  place  which  a  repuhlican  government  promises  to 
every  citizen.  Such  interest  is  lacking  too  often.  ^  Mod- 
ern experience  goes  to  show  that  very  frequently  the 
voter  not  only  does  not  resent  such  a  flagrant  denial  of 
his  just  rights,  but  being  deeply  occupied  with  private 
affairs,  permits  unscrupulous  demagogues  and  profes- 
sional politicians  to  usurp  them  unquestioned  and  un- 
condemned.  He  is  too  often  satisfied  because  the  same 
"chai-m  of  regular  nomination,"  to  which  reference  has 
already  been  made  in  connection  with  the  influence  of 
the  legislative  and  the  congressional  caucuses,  holds 
over  him  and  prevents  him  from  seeing,  or  trying  to  see, 
anytliing  wrong  in  the  candidate  who  has  been  "regu- 
larly" chosen,  though  his  wishes  may  have  been  entirely 
disregarded  or  lawlessly  defied  in  the  process. 

This  criticism  is  however  not  entirely  just  if  made 
without  reservation  and  without  a  recognition  of  the 
practical  difficulties  which  beset  the  voter  in  an  effort  to 
maintain  his  rights  to  share  in  the  nomination  of  candi- 
dates. It  is  so  easy  to  throw  back  upon  the  citizen  en- 
tire responsibility  for  the  loss  of  which  he  complains.  It 
is  a  sort  of  argument  which  silences  protest  and  which 
especially  satisfies  the  superficial.  It  involves  very 
much  less  labor  than  to  grapple  with  the  ugly  problem. 
But  what  is  the  significance  of  the  figures  given  of  the 
falling  off  of  the  votes  at  the  caucuses  or  primaries  in 
the  last  twelve  or  fifteen  years  ?  Whoever  has  partici- 
pated in  or  intelligently  observed  the  contest  between  the 
great  body  of  citizens  and  tlie  perfected  modem  political 
"machines"  in  this  and  other  States,  has  witnessed  a  pro- 
tracted and  heroic  struggle  on  tlie  part  of  the  citizen  to 

•  Hofer,  American  Primary  System,  p.  55.   1896. 


The  Corrupt  Caucus  of  To-day.  45 

maintain  his  citizenship.  Again  and  again  have  the 
drilled  and  disciplined  politicians  overcome  the  major- 
ity, or  when  that  chanced  to  fail  bought  the  delegates 
outright  in  the  conventions.  The  best  troops  the  world 
has  ever  seen  have  been  utterly  demoralized  as  a  fight- 
ing power  after  repeated  defeat.  A  half  million  voters 
in  a  single  State  are  not  driven  away  from  participation 
in  primary  elections  without  adequate  cause.  The  de- 
scendants of  the  men  who  fought  to  establish  independ- 
ence and  later  to  preserve  the  Union,  are  not  cowards, 
neither  are  they  dully  indifferent  to  the  highest  privi- 
leges of  citizenship.  They  have  been  beaten  and  driven 
from  the  field  time  after  time  by  forces  inferior  in  num- 
bers, but  more  powerful  than  armed  battalions.  The 
contest  is  as  unequal  and  hopeless  upon  this  field,  and 
under  existing  conditions,  as  it  is  when  hosts  armed  with 
the  old  muzzle-loading  Springfield  rifle  are  marshalled 
against  a  small  compact  body  equipped  with  the  ma- 
chine guns  of  to-day. 

Neither  is  it  true  that  the  "charm  of  regular  nomina- 
tions" maintains  its  former  potency  with  all  classes  of 
voters.  The  citizen  at  the  general  election  is  asserting 
his  individual  preference.  The  years  from  1884  to 
1900  have  witnessed  the  political  supremacy  in  national 
administration  change  with  each  recurring  election,  ex- 
cepting the  last.  In  state,  congressional,  and  legislative 
elections  the  independence  of  the  voter  is  more  and  more 
asserted.  The  overwhelming  majorities  of  former  years 
have  disappeared  or  become  so  uncertain  as  to  demon- 
strate that  where  the  voter  has  been  denied  a  voice  in  the 
selection  of  party  candidates  the  "regular  caucus  and 
convention  nomination"  no  longer  compels  the  old-time 


46  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

party  support.  At  the  primary  election,  also,  the  in- 
creasing strength  of  the  independent  candidate  who  has 
been  defeated  in  a  regular  "machine-controlled"  conven- 
tion, testifies  to  a  growing  freedom  and  independence  of 
thought  on  part  of  the  voter.  This  is  a  welcome  sign  of 
political  reform.  Like  a  wand,  independent  thought 
breaks  the  spell  of  regular  nominations  and  awakens  the 
voter  to  the  dangers  which  beset  him  as  a  citizen. 

REFERENCES. 

Bryce,  jAMEa  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  II,  pp.  84-89, 93- 
104.     1889. 

Dallinger,  F,  "W.  a  "Word  about  the  Caucus.  New  Eng.  Mag., 
August,  1893,  p.  754. 

Eaton,  Dorman  B.  Primary  Elections.  Amer.  CycL  of  Pol.  Sci., 
Vol.  Ill,  p.  343. 

Field,  D.  D.  The  Primary,  the  Pivot  of  Reform.  Forum,  Octo- 
ber, 1892,  p.  189. 

GODKIN,  E.  L.  The  Caucus  and  the  Republican  Party.  Nation, 
July,  1868,  p.  4. 

Green,  G.  W.  Facts  about  the  Caucus.  North  Amer.  Rev.,  Sep- 
tember, 1883,  p.  257. 

HoFER,  E.    The  American  Primary  System.    1896. 

Hoffman,  E.  F.    Primary  Elections.    August,  1881,  p.  602. 

Lawton,  G.  W.    The  American  Caucus  System.     1885. 

Means,  D.  M.  Trouble  with  the  Caucus.  New  Eng.  Mag.,  July, 
1875,  p.  473. 

Merwin,  H.  C.  Tammany  Hall.  Atlan.  Mo,,  February,  1894, 
p.  240. 

Remsen,  Daniel.    Primary  Elections.    1891 

Sedgwick,  A.  G.  Legalization  of  Caucuses.  Nation,  February, 
1869,  p.  86. 

Stickney,  Albert.    Democratic  Government.    1885. 

Thayer,  Adin.    Speech  on  Caucus.    Boston  Herald,  Oct  9,  1881. 

Tyno,  T.  Mitchell.  Tammany  from  Within.  Tammany  Hall 
Souvenir,  N.  Y.,  1893. 

Whitridge,  F.  W.  The  Caucus  System.  Amer.  Cycl.  of  Pol.  Sci., 
Vol.  I,  p.  356. 


The  Corrupt  Caucus  of  To-day.  47 

WiQMORE,  John  H.    The  Australian  Ballot  System.    1889. 
Williams,  Talcott.    Tammany  HalL    Amer.  Cycl.  of  Pol  Sci 
Vol.  III. 

Movement  for  Better  Primaries.     Rev.  of  Rev.,  May,  1898, 

p.  57. 

The  Caucus  System  in  the  United  States.     Christian  Ex- 
aminer, September,  1869,  p.  139. 

The  Caucus.    Fortnightly  (N.  Amer.  Series),  November  1, 

1878,  p.  721. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  CONVENTION  IN  ITS  BEST  DAYS. 

The  modern  convention  is  the  cause  of  much  strife 
among  our  political  speakers  and  writers.  Its  value  is 
questioned ;  its  life  threatened.  It  has  many  enthusi- 
astic supporters  and  many  earnest  opponents.  It  is  as- 
sailed in  uncompromising  terms  and  defended  with  elo- 
quent eulogy.  This  conflict  means  that  something  is 
wrong. 

Whatever  may  he  said  of  the  present  state  of  this  old 
institution,  it  ought  not  to  be  condemned  upon  super- 
ficial and  insufficient  grounds.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  in  the  course  of  its  time-honored  existence  it  has 
been  of  inestimable  service  to  this  country.  Its  evolu- 
tion which  has  already  been  traced  shows  that  the  forces 
which  created  it  were  democratic;  that  it  arose  as  the 
servant  of  the  people.  If  it  has  turned  false  to  its  mis- 
sion, the  power  which  created  it  will  also  destroy  it. 

To-day  the  struggle  is  on.  Whether  it  is  the  final  one 
to  the  death  lies  with  the  future.  The  quest  is  still,  as 
ever,  for  truer  and  purer  lepresentation.  As  in  the  past 
our  nominating  institutions  have  conformed  to  the  times 
and  the  tenor  of  the  people,  so  may  the  convention  sys- 
tem of  to-day  be  changed  or  wholly  abolished.  The  mere 
fact  of  its  long  existence  does  not  argue  for  continued 
life.  Before  taking  up  the  discussion  of  the  present  con- 
dition of  the  convention,  it  is  well  tO'  look  at  the  advan- 
tages of  this  institution  under  ideal  conditions,  or  at 


The  Pure  Convention.  49 

least  under  sucli  conditions  as  have  enabled  it  to  operate 
to  its  best  advantage.  These  are  often  utilized  during 
campaigns  to  blind  the  public  when  justness  and  fair- 
ness would  demand  a  closer  adherence  to  actual  condi- 
tions. 

Theoretically  the  convention  system  is  perfect.  It 
passes  the  highest  test  of  a  political  institution  in  a  dem- 
ocratic community.  It  admits  of  the  purest  application 
of  the  principle  of  representation  or  delegated  author- 
ity. Step  by  step  the  voice  of  each  individual  voter  can, 
in  theory,  be  transmitted  from  delegate  to  delegate  until 
finally  it  finds  its  perfect  expression  in  the  legislature, 
the  executive,  or  the  judiciary.  The  nearest  approach 
to  such  ideal  conditions  of  operation  was  reached  by  the 
convention  system  during  its  early  days. 

As  a  party  institution,  the  convention  once  occupied 
the  highest  and  most  important  position.  When  so  con- 
ducted as  to  command  the  confidence  and  respect  of  the 
party,  it  was  the  foundation  of  party  success.  Within 
it  there  sprang  up  the  central  moving  figures  of  the  cam- 
paign. It  contributed  to  bind  party  elements  firmly  to- 
gether, and  to  inspire  enthusiastic  party  life,  and  thereby 
performed  a  valuable  service  in  the  cause  of  govern- 
ment. 

That  political  parties  are  essential  in  politics  to-day, 
as  in  the  past,  cannot  be  questioned.  They  seize  upon 
public  problems,  discuss  the  public  policies,  analyze 
laws,  study  administration,  scrutinize  the  acts  of  public 
oflScers,  and  search  their  ranks  for  faithful  public  serv- 
ants. They  criticise  each  other's  doings,  and  observe  all 
political  movements  with  microscopic  accuracy.  Organ- 
izations which  serve  such  purposes  may  well  live  on,  and 
4 


50  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

institutions  whicli  have  promoted  their  vigor  may  well 
be  defended. 

The  convention  was  the  foundation  of  party  success, 
because  it  furnished  an  excellent  opportunity  for  the 
perfection  of  party  organization,  as  well  as  for  the  pros- 
ecution of  a  vigorous  campaign,  in  which  all  party  forces 
were  formed  in  line  and  operated  with  united  power  for 
a  common  end.  It  afforded  an  excellent  opportunity 
for  the  estimation  of  a  party's  strength,  for  it  was  com- 
posed of  men  from  every  locality,  and  from  every  part 
of  the  State.  Usually  these  were  representative  men, 
fully  cognizant  of  party  conditions  in  their  home  com- 
munity. Through  their  conference  the  standing  and 
fortunes  of  the  party  were  ascertained,  and  the  party 
policy  shaped  accordingly. 

It  ako  afforded  opportunity  for  the  estimation  of  a 
candidate's  real  popularity.  Fatal  mistakes  were  some- 
times avoided  by  the  timely  substitution  of  new  nom- 
inees for  intended  candidates,  whose  standing  with  the 
party  masses  had  been  misjudged.  A  party  to  be  suc- 
cessful must  offer  to  the  public  men  who  will  be  well 
supported,  and  upon  whom  the  people  are  willing  to  be- 
stow the  title  of  a  public  servant.  Such  candidates 
could  well  be  chosen  in  a  gathering  of  party  men,  repre- 
senting all  geographical  ureas,  all  interests,  and  all  fac- 
tions covered  by  the  election. 

It  has  also  happened  that  in  conventions  an  "undis- 
covered" candidate  of  good  pai'ts  and  popular  quality 
was  successfully  advertised  and  came  before  the  elector- 
ate in  time  to  win  success  for  the  party.  A  capable  man, 
who  was  unknown  to  the  mass  of  party  voters,  and  who 
might  possibly  have  remained  unknown  too  long  to  be  of 


The  Pure  Convention.  51 

service  to  his  party,  has  been  accidentallj  so  discovered 
and  nominated,  and  his  party  and  the  public  well  served 
by  him. 

Likewise,  also,  men  of  special  merit  hare  found  in  the 
meetings  of  delegates  fortunate  opportunities  for  ac- 
quiring prominence  without  great  loss  of  time  or  money. 
To  these  time  is  often  more  important  than  money.  The 
necessary  personal  advertising  required  for  a  prelim- 
inary canvass,  aside  from  its  disagreeable  features, 
would  have  consumed  a  forbidding  amount  of  time  if 
done  with  sufficient  thoroughness  to  insure  a  nomina- 
tion; while  many  a  young  man  of  ability  would  have 
found  the  drain  upon  his  finances  in  conducting  a  pro- 
tracted personal  campaign  too  severe  to  enable  him  to 
win  the  day  for  himself  in  the  usual  way. 

A  harmonious  party  convention  has  always  presented 
excellent  opportunities  for  arousing  party  enthusiasm. 
Under  such  conditions  partisan  meets  partisan,  speeches 
are  made  and  heard,  the  party  enthusiasm  of  the  North 
greets  that  of  the  South,  the  party  cry  of  the  West 
mingles  with  that  of  the  East,  party  spirit  rises  to  its 
height,  and  inspires  its  color  bearers  to  act  their  best 
Not  only  would  party  fires  flame  up  in  such  conventions, 
but  each  of  the  delegates  returning  to  his  community 
warmed  with  the  spirit  of  party  enthusiasm,  would  re- 
inforce the  local  campaign  with  renewed  vigor,  and 
would  rally  his  wavering  friends  to  freshened  efforts 
and  stronger  party  affiliations. 

The  convention  at  its  best,  has  also  afforded  favorable 
opportunity  for  the  conciliation  of  party  factions.  Unity 
within  a  pai-ty  is  absolutely  necessary  for  success,  unless 
the  minority  parties  are  iinusually  weak.  This  unity  has 


52  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

always  been  difficult  to  maintain.  It  is  natural  tliat 
party  leaders  should  differ  in  their  conceptions  of  what 
would  be  the  best  party  policies.  Each  stands  at  the 
helm  of  the  party  in  his  own  locality,  and  has  his  own 
little  band  of  followers.  Each  develops  his  ideas  in  the 
light  of  his  home,  and  rallies  to  his  standard  the  partisan 
friends  of  the  neighborhood.  Some  day  they  must  clash. 
That  day  comes  with  the  opening  of  the  preliminary 
campaign.  The  party  platform  must  be  formulated, 
and  the  party  candidates  selected.  Differences  must  be 
adjusted  and  compromises  must  be  made.  The  con- 
vention when  assembled  and  conducted  as  a  deliberative 
body  controlled  by  its  best  elements  for  the  greatest 
good,  would  be  an  ideal  place  for  settling  such  differ- 
ences, diminishing  the  chances  of  party  bolting,  because 
the  consummated  conciliation  would  be  a  general  one, 
effected  in  the  presence  of  the  main  party  spirits,  and 
hence,  as  a  rule,  binding  and  abiding. 

The  ideal  convention  would  also  enable  the  selection 
of  representative  men  who  would  receive  the  most  gen- 
eral support  of  the  party,  because  proper  emphasis  could 
be  placed  upon  the  following  important  elements  of 
party  success:  Geographical  distribution  of  the  candi- 
dates; their  nationality;  their  social  standing;  the  class 
represented ;  the  commercial,  industrial,  or  agricultural 
interests,  etc.,  that  they  stood  for;  the  shades  of  political 
ideas  entertained, — all  these  matters  could  be  dulv  con- 
sidered. 

Such  a  convention  would  be  the  place  where  the  party 
platform  could  well  be  formulated.  It  Avould  be  a  de- 
liberative and  thoroughly  representative  body,  where 
every  locality,  every  faction,  every  class,  and  every  in- 


The  Pure  Convention.  53 

terest  would  find  a  voice  in  the  meeting.  It  would  be  a 
decidedly  up-to-date  body.  Its  delegates  would  have 
been  but  shortly  elected,  and  in  a  position  to  define  party 
issues  intelligently.  The  platform  which  they  framed 
would  have  the  general  confidence  of  the  party,  and 
operate  as  a  binding  element  on  dissatisfied  members. 

The  convention  thus,  in  theory,  lies  at  the  foundation 
of  party  success.  It  perfects  party  organization,  meas- 
ures its  strength,  conciliates  its  factions,  defines  its  is- 
sues, selects  its  candidates,  and  arouses  euthusiasm.  For 
these  many  reasons  its  advocates  i-till  regard  it  as  a  most 
valuable  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  party. 

In  its  best  days  the  convention  docs  not  seem  to  have 
favored  any  one  party  more  than  any  other.  Its  advan- 
tages seem  to  have  come  to  all.  The  dominant  party  was 
not  maintained  in  power  by  it.  Great  leaders  came  for- 
ward in  the  ranks  of  the  minority,  for  the  possibilities 
of  a  vigorous  campaign  stood  out  clearly.  The  minor- 
ity party  could  thoroughly  gauge  its  strength  through  its 
assembled  delegates,  who  could  also  fairly  estimate  the 
strength  and  chances  of  their  opponents.  Any  reaction 
or  weakness  could  be  recorded,  and  the  enthusiasm  and 
hope  of  success  inspired.  Under  such  conditions  the 
weakest  party  may  find  a  convention  in  session  a  life- 
sustaining  power  that  may  be  made  the  living  exponent 
of  the  courage  and  fire  of  good  sound  issues,  which,  if 
they  be  properly  brought  before  the  public,  will  attract 
attention,  and  may  lead  on  to  victory. 

In  its  best  days  the  convention  was  also  a  school  of 
practical  politics.  In  it  the  youth  of  the  rising  genera- 
tion, who  were  to  control  the  destinies  of  the  Nation, 
were  taught  the  earlier  and  simpler  lessons  of  practical 


64  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

politics.  They  learned  to  know  tlie  constitution  and 
operation  of  our  nominating  machinery,  and  received 
an  insight  into  the  inner  workings  of  party  politics. 
Such  experience  cannot  but  prove  of  great  worth  to  men 
who  in  the  future  assume  public  leadership  and  occupy 
positions  of  importance  in  the  public  service. 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  in  theory,  or  when  at  its  best, 
the  convention  possesses  a  large  capacity  for  perform- 
ing valuable  services  to  the  individual,  to  the  party, 
and  to  the  State;  and  that  it  has  occupied  a  very  im- 
portant position  among  our  political  institutions.  How- 
ever, we  must  remember  that  in  speaking  of  its  merits  in 
the  foregoing  pages,  ideal  conditions  of  politics  are  as- 
sumed, or,  at  least,  such  conditions  as  would  admit  of  its 
operation  in  a  manner  so  as  to  produce  all  possible  ad- 
vantages. Actual  conditions,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  suc- 
ceeding chapter,  alter  the  case  considerably.  The  pres- 
ent study  has,  however,  revealed  the  fact  that  the  con- 
vention yields  certain  positive  advantages  to  political 
life  which  corruption  in  its  worst  forms  can  alone  de- 
stroy ;  hence  none  but  the  most  weighty  of  reasons  can 
justify  its  abolition  or  its  displacement  by  some  other 
institution.  Whether  or  no  such  reasons  exist  is  the 
subject  of  the  next  inquiry.^ 

>  For  ref  erenceb  see  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  MODERN  CORRUPT  CONVENTION. 

The  merits  of  our  convention  system  as  enumerated 
in  the  preceding  chapter,  as  already  emphasized,  abound 
only  where  politics  are  pure  and  normal;  where  every 
member  of  the  party  has  a  full  voice  which  he  can  dele- 
gate to  men  who  faithfully  represent  his  wishes  in  the 
performance  of  all  the  functions  of  a  convention.  Such 
conditions  are  generally  lacking  at  the  present  time. 
Where  the  "machine"  controls  politics  the  voter  has 
ceased  to  speak  in  the  convention.  His  voice  is  lost  in 
the  course  of  its  transmission.  The  delegates  are  not  rep- 
resentative of  a  body  of  citizens,  but  of  a  narrow  ring  of 
politicians.  The  convention  is  not  the  mouthpiece  of  the 
people,  but  of  the  "machine,"  and  that  fine  theory  of 
representation  of  which  it  seems  so  perfect  an  embodi- 
ment falls  flatly  to  the  ground. 

It  would  seem  bulj  natural  that  the  corruption  of  the 
convention  should  proceed  in  much  the  same  way  as  did 
that  of  the  primary.  Its  vulnerable  spots  are  laid  bare 
under  very  similar  conditions  of  life.  Dense  popula- 
tions, prosperity,  and  wealth,  have  destroyed  its  effi- 
ciency as  they  did  that  of  the  primary.  It  is  in  New 
York,  Philadelphia,  Pittsburg,  Chicago,  and  other  greab 
cities  of  this  country  that  its  evils  are  most  glaring  and 
its  enemies  most  numerous  and  bitter. 

How  far  the  perversion  of  a  convention's  representa- 
tive character  will  proceed,  depends  upon  its  nature; 


66  Caucus  and  Contention  System. 

upon  the  importance  of  the  offices  for  which  nominations 
are  to  be  made;  upon  the  localities  represented  in  the 
convention,  whether  urban  or  rural,  or  both;  upon  the 
place  of  meeting;  upon  the  lapse  of  time  between  the 
choice  of  the  delegates  and  their  meeting ;  and  above  all, 
upon  the  character  of  the  delegates  selected. 

The  evils  which  find  their  way  into  conventions  as  de- 
termined more  or  less  by  these  factors,  may  be  grouped 
into  two  classes, — those  which  are  due  to  the  corrupt 
primary  upon  which  the  convention  rests,  and  those 
which  spring  directly  from  the  convention.  The  latter 
may  again  be  subdivided  into  those  resulting  from  the 
operation  of  external  corrupting  forces,  which  are  due 
mainly  to  political  combinations,  and  those  arising  from 
internal  corrupting  forces,  such  as  personal  considera- 
tions and  moral  weaknesses  of  delegates.  The  latter  are 
given  much  leeway  because  of  the  complexity  of  the  sys- 
tem ;  the  difficulty  of  binding  delegates  with  definite  in- 
structions ;  the  use  of  proxies ;  and  the  impossibility  of 
selecting  so  large  a  number  of  men  as  the  convention 
system  requires  who  are  all  of  a  desirable  stamp  of 
character  and  ability. 

As  to  the  first  class  of  evils,  it  need  only  be  said  that 
much  of  the  corruption  which  is  found,  cannot  be  en- 
tirely attributed  to  the  convention,  but  finds  its  source 
in  the  impure  primary  which  precedes  it,  for  where  the 
primary  has  fallen,  the  convention  must  follow  because 
of  the  injection  of  its  corrupt  delegates.  Where  the  rep- 
resentative character  of  a  convention  is  defeated  in  this 
manner,  the  blame  cannot  justly  be  laid  at  the  door  of 
the  convention  in  which  the  corruption  crops  out,  but 
lies  with  the  unsound  primaries  upon  wliich  it  is  built. 


The  Corrupt  Convention.  57 

There  are,  however,  certain  evils  inherent  in  the  nat- 
ure of  the  convention  considered  independently  as  an  in- 
stitution, which  alone  tend  to  defeat  its  democratic 
character  no  matter  how  pure  the  primaries  may  he. 
Even  though  the  voter's  voice  carries  safely  at  the  pri- 
mary, even  though  ho  succeeds  in  getting  delegates  of 
his  liking,  it  often  happens  that  his  wishes  are  ignored, 
forgotten,  or  traded,  before  they  can  find  a  faithful  ex- 
pression. To  this  extent  the  convention  is  an  imperfect 
institution.  It  cannot  he  reformed,  hecause  remedial 
legislation  merely  reaches  functional  troubles,  and  the 
principal  trouble  with  the  convention  is  not  functional ; 
it  is  organic. 

We  may  first  study  the  evils  which  surround  the  con- 
vention as  a  result  of  external  corrupting  influences. 
They  vary  widely  mth  the  localities.  They  depend  upon 
the  activity  of  the  "machine"  politician,  and  the  dele- 
gates w^ho  are  to  be  "worked."  Three  classes  of  delegates 
may  be  distinguished  in  conventions :  The  "fixed"  dele- 
gates who  represent  the  "machine-controlled"  primaries, 
and  who  axe  found  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in  most  of 
the  conventions  held  in  this  country ;  the  faithful  and  in- 
dependent delegates  of  a  staunch  and  incorruptible  char- 
acter, who  faithfully  express  the  wishes  of  their  con- 
stituents, and  who  would  do  so  under  any  conditions; 
and  between  these  extremes,  a  Avavering  class,  which  is 
more  or  less  susceptible  to  coniipt  influences.  In  its 
ranks  the  havoc  of  evil  runs  riot.  Its  presence  makes 
the  activity  of  the  professional  politician  profitable  be- 
yond the  confines  of  the  primary.  If  he  has  failed  at 
the  latter  another  opportimity  presents  itself  at  the  con- 
vention.    If  the  "machine"  lacks  a  sufficient  number  of 


5S  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

adherents  to  control  the  nominations  at  which  it  aims. 
there  is  still  a  chance  to  win  over  these  "workable"  del- 
egates before  the  convention  has  performed  its  func- 
tions. 

The  political  worker  is  aided  in  his  schemes  of  brib- 
ery and  corruption  by  the  complexity  of  the  convention 
system.  The  multiplicity  of  offices  to  be  filled,  and  the 
variety  of  their  grades,  including  those  of  the  town, 
city,  county.  State,  and  Nation,  each  of  which  requires 
its  own  particular  set  of  conventions,  has  given  rise  to 
a  bewildering  intricacy  in  our  nominating  institutions.-* 
In  some  cases  delegates  to  higher  conventions  are  se- 
lected by  delegates  to  lower  conventions.  All  this  in- 
tricacy, which  confuses  the  average  voter,  makes  proper 
instruction  almost  impossible,  lessens  the  responsibility 
of  the  delegates,  and  eases  the  way  for  the  professional 
politician  who  has  thoroughly  mastered  its  details,  and 
enables  him  to  manipulate  his  forces  successfully. 

The  complexity  of  the  system  also  gives  rise  to  a  sec- 
ond advantage  for  the  "boss"  and  the  ring-leader.  The 
numerous  conventions  require  a  number  of  delegates  so 
large  that  it  is  difficult  to  find  a  sufficient  number  of 
good  men  who  are  willing  to  act.  Successful  business 
men,  or  professional  men,  generally  refuse  to  act  be- 
cause of  lack  of  time,  while  capable  men  of  leisure  fre- 
quently refuse  upon  the  ground  that  it  is  humiliating 
and  undignified  to  attend  a  convention  dominated  by 
the  "machine,"  and  there  find  the  wishes  of  one's  con- 
stituents entirely  ignored.  Hence  a  class  of  fickle  poli- 
ticians who  spend  their  time  in  politics  for  what  they 
can  get  out  of  it,  are  likely  to  find  their  way  into  the  con- 

>  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  II,  pp.  85  and  89.    1889. 


The  Corrupt  Convention.  69 

vention  halls,  where  they  constitute  plastic  material  in 
the  hands  of  the  deputed  convention  workers  of  the 
"machine." 

The  custom  of  sending  proxies  is  also  fraught  with 
much  evil  in  that  it  removes  the  responsibility  of  the 
original  delegate  to  his  constituents.  He  may  yield  his 
seat  in  the  convention  to  his  proxy,  to  escape  disagree- 
able business,  or  for  one  pretense  or  another  allow  him 
to  take  his  place.  The  "machine"  may  by  contrivances 
and  intrigues^  aid  in  the  process,  especially  if  the  proxy 
is  already  "fixed;"  It  is  a  usual  subterfuge  to  head  a 
delegate  ticket  with  the  name  of  a  man  of  known  prob- 
ity, and  perhaps  even  to  fill  out  the  list  with  men  of  this 
character,  when  it  is  certain  that  these  men  will  not 
serve,  and  that  unknown  alternates  or  proxies,  sub- 
sen'ient  to  the  "bosses,"  will  sit  in  the  convention.-^  Thus 
it  happens  that  the  practice  of  proxyship  plays  right 
into  the  hands  of  the  professional  politicians. 

The  "machine-controlled"  committee  of  credentials  is 
also  a  source  of  common  and  glaring  frauds  in  conven- 
tions. It  is  a  means  by  which  the  first  class  of  dele- 
gates, the  staunch  and  true  and  "imworkable"  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people,  are  prevented  from  taking  their 
seats  in  the  convention  upon  one  pretense  or  another, 
while  the  "machine"  proxies  are  put  in  their  places. 

Similar  grave  results  may  proceed  from  the  practice 
of  instruction  for  second  choice,  for  it  also  presents  the 
opportunity  of  dropping  the  candidate  of  first  choice 
upon  one  plea  or  another,  if  "trading"  or  "logrolling" 
accompanied  by  personal  advantage  should  make  this  ex- 
pedient. Every  practice  of  this  kind  which  increases  the 

>  Arena,  Jime,  1897. 


60  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

freedom  of  the  delegates,  weakens  the  force  of  their  in- 
structions, and  increases  the  possibility  of  "machine" 
control. 

Since  considerable  time  usually  elapses  between  the 
selection  of  the  delegates  and  the  assembly  of  the  con- 
vention, the  chances  to  defeat  the  wishes  of  the  people 
are  only  too  ample.  The  pressure  that  is  brought  to  bear 
upon  delegates  through  personal  influences,  political 
prestige,  use  of  money,  threat,  and  cunning  duplicity,  is 
tremendous  and  well-nigh  irresistible,  unless  indeed  the 
heart  and  mind  are  firmly  fixed  beforehand. 

Again  and  again  we  find  disgraceful  instances  of  dele- 
gates who  in  the  hour  of  temptation  fail  in  strength,  and 
sacrifice  their  honor  as  well  as  the  sacred  trust  confided 
to  them  by  their  constituents,  for  money,  ofiice,  or  polit- 
ical advantage.  Experience  has  shown  that  in  conven- 
tions at  which  candidates  for  the  most  important  public 
offices  are  chosen  there  have  been  a  sufficient  number  of 
weak  or  corrupt  delegates  who  could  he  bought  with 
gold  to  enable  the  political  cabal  to  control  nominations. 
Indeed,  it  may  be  said  that  the  more  important  the  con- 
vention the  greater  the  inducement  to  buy  delegates,  and 
the  greater  the  certainty  of  their  being  bought.  In- 
stances of  the  purchase  of  delegated  votes  in  city  conven- 
tions are  notorious  and  appalling.  Their  mere  enumera- 
tion would  fill  many  pages,  and  their  details  ought  to 
bring  a  blush  of  shame  and  indignation  to  the  cheeks  of 
every  patriotic  citizen.^ 

From  within  also  fatal  influences  are  at  work  gnaw- 
ing at  the  purity  and  the  life  of  the  structure.  Personal 
considerations,  ranging  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest, 

>  For  an  everyday  illustration,  see  Outlool:;,  December  8,  1900,  p.  861 


The  Corru])t  Convention.  61 

will  sometimes  intervene  between  tlie  wishes  of  the 
voters  and  the  choice  of  the  candidates.  It  is  perhaps 
not  too  much  to  saj  that  the  average  delegate  hopes  to 
have  his  personal  fortunes  affected  bv  the  selection  of 
this  or  that  man.  He  endeavors  to  work  his  way  in  the 
convention  in  that  direction  in  which  he  can  at  the  same 
time  best  work  his  constituents  for  future  support.  That 
this  should  be  a  strong  and  even  predominant  motive  on 
the  part  of  many  delegates  in  the  selection  of  candidates 
is  but  natural.  The  position  of  the  delegate  is  purely 
honorary  and  requires  much  time.  Men  of  business  fre- 
quently refuse  to  accept  it  for  this  reason.  Hence,  the 
men  who  serve  usually  are  in  politics  for  purely  selfish 
purposes.  Not  that  they  always  and  necessarily  enter- 
tain ideas  of  corruption,  but  that  they  work  for  a  polit- 
ical future,  or  hope  to  earn  public  reward  from  their 
constituents.  Hence,  the  delegates  who  do  not  fall  as 
prey  to  the  "machine,"  are  strongly  tempted  to  become 
the  victims  of  their  o^\^l  selfish  aspirations.^ 

The  wavering  delegate  Avho  hesitates  to  yield  himself 
to  these  personal  considerations,  is  strengthened  in  his 
wrongful  tendencies,  as  already  suggested,  by  the  fact 
of  indefinite  or  uncertain  instructions,  or  their  total  ab- 
sence.    Even  though  the  voter  knew  in  each  particular 

1  The  system  in  all  its  details  is  inherently  bad.  It  not  only  favors,  but,  log- 
ically and  inevitably,  produces  manipulation,  scheming,  trickery,  fraud  and 
corruption.  The  delegate  elected  in  caucus  is  nominally  the  agent  of  the  voter 
to  act  for  him  ui  convention.  Too  frequently  he  has  his  own  interests  alone  at 
heart,  and,  for  this  reason,  has  secured  his  selection  as  a  delegate.  As  a  conse- 
quence, he  acts  not  for  the  voter,  but  serves  his  own  purpose  instead.  This  fact 
in  itself  taints  the  trust  from  the  outset,  and  poisons  the  system  at  its  very 
source.  Ko  legitimate  busmess  could  survive  under  a  system  where  authority 
to  transact  its  vital  matters  was  delegated  and  redelegated  to  agents  and  sub- 
agents,  who  controlled  their  own  selection,  construed  their  own  obhgations,  and 
were  responsible  to  nobody.  Gov.  Robert  M.  La  FoUette's  message  to  Legis- 
lature, 1901. 


62  Caucus  and  Contention  System. 

instance  just  wliat  candidate  lie  wished  to  vote  for,  and 
what  delegate  he  must  support  to  do  so,  he  would  still 
be  involved  in  perplexities  occasioned  by  the  multitude 
of  offices  to  be  filled  in  some  cases  by  each  convention.^ 
He  might  be  able  to  make  up  a  ticket  of  delegates  who 
would  all  be  favorable  to  any  one  of  the  candidates  he 
desires  to  see  nominated,  but  such  is  the  variety  of  opin- 
ions that  he  would  find  it  impossible  to  name  a  list  of 
delegates  who  would  be  unanimously  favorable  to  his 
choice  for  every  one  of  a  number  of  offices.  To  this  must 
be  added  the  almost  boundless  confusion  which  would  re- 
sult should  he  endeavor  to  instruct  each  delegate  as  to 
first  and  second  choice.  Hence  it  would  be  quite  im- 
possible for  him  to  charge  eaeh  delegate  with  definite 
instructions  as  to  each  candidate  to  be  nominated.  Only 
very  general  instructions  proceeding  on  a  party  basis  are 
possible.^ 

Aside  from  all  these  disadvantages  and  difficulties, 
springing  from  the  convention,  there  is  also  the  fact  that 
instead  of  being  a  peaceful  reasoning  body  where  party 
policies  may  be  carefully  weighed,  and  party  issues 
thoughtfully  defined ;  where  the  relative  merits  of  pro- 
posed candidates  may  be  thoroughly  discussed,  and  the 
platform  drawn  from  the  best  sources  of  cahn  thought, 
it  is  often  the  scene  of  the  wi^  dest  demonstrations,  where 
party  issues  are  "cooked  and  dried"  beforehand  by  a  few 
self -constituted  leaders  and  then  yelled  into  a  platform 
in  frenzied  excitement;  where  opposition  melts  under 
the  eloquence  of  magnetic  speeches;  where  the  most 

'  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  11,  p.  95.    1889. 

'This  objection  holds  only  where  the  same  delegates  nominate  a  number  of 
candidates;  as,  for  instance,  an  entire  state  ticket.  It  could  easily  be  overcome 
by  a  direct  exercise  of  his  choice  at  a  primary  election. 


The  Corrupt  Convention.  63 

sacred  wishes  of  the  people  are  forgotten  under  the  power 
of  the  crowning  orator  who  paints  the  glories  of  his  fa- 
vorite, or  springs  the  "dark  horse"  or  unknown  candi- 
date, and  sees  him  nominated  amidst  storms  of  meaning- 
less applause.  Sober,  sturdy  thought  cannot  abide  on 
such  occasions,  where  emotion,  instead  of  reason,  rules. 
Why  wonder  that  when  the  day  has  passed  and  an  accus- 
ing voice  calls  the  faithless  delegate  to  account,  he  is 
mute,  and  stupidly  shakes  his  head  in  perplexity  at  his 
own  doings !  Where  feelings  run  riot  as  they  so  eom- 
monly  do  in  our  modem  conventions,  their  proper  func- 
tion as  rational,  deliberative  bodies  is  entirely  destroyed. 

These  inherent  weaknesses  of  the  convention  system 
have  been  the  cause  of  its  decline.  Under  the  influences 
of  the  many  corrupting  forces  which  ever  play  in  poli- 
tics, it  has  gradually  degenerated.  Its  representative 
structure  has  been  broken  down,  and  upon  its  ruins 
there  has  been  reared  a  new  and  despotic  institution 
dominated  by  an  unscrupulous  "machine"  that  has 
forced  its  way  into  party  leadership,  and  falsely  pre- 
sumes to  act  in  the  interests  of  its  members. 

This  change,  wherever  it  has  been  consummated,  is 
fatal  to  the  party,  to  the  people,  and  to  the  institution. 
The  convention  may  continue  to  exist  under  such  condi- 
tions, but  it  has  lost  the  function  for  which  it  was 
called  into  existence,  and  hence  deserves  to  be  destroyed. 
It  has  lost  its  democratic  spirit,  for  the  voter  no  longer 
speaks  in  its  halls.  It  has  left  the  party  powerless.  Its 
advantages  in  developing  party  organization,  and  its  aid 
to  party  success,  have  been  transferred  to  the  "machine" 
which  has  made  itself  the  party's  mouthpiece.  Instead 
of  being  the  stronghold  of  the  party,  it  is  the  stronghold 


61  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

of  the  "machine."  Instead  of  being  the  servant  of  the 
people,  it  is  the  servant  of  the  "boss."  It  affords  oppor- 
tunities for  the  "machine"  to  estimate  its  strength ;  to 
v^eigh  the  popularity  of  its  candidates;  to  "advertise" 
and  "push  good  material" ;  to  arouse  enthusiasm  among 
its  "workers";  and  to  bind  the  "iniquitous  brother- 
hood" of  political  schemers  more  closely  together. 

Instead  of  being  a  calm,  deliberative  body,  fit  to  form- 
ulate a  successful  platform,  it  is  as  a  rule  "a  tempestuous 
storm  center  where  opposing  factions  contend  with  each 
other ;  "  where  debate  is  cut  off  by  resolution ;  where 
"trading,"  "logrolling,"  and  compromising  defeat  the 
best  wishes  of  the  people ;  where,  without  deliberation, 
the  plan  of  a  few  self -constituted  leaders  is  foisted  upon 
the  convention ;  where  the  "dark  horse"  is  sprung  by  the 
"machine's"  orator  as  the  only  solution  of  a  deadlock; 
where  the  youth  of  the  Nation  instead  of  learning  their 
first  lessons  in  the  great  science  of  government  are 
trained  in  the  ways  of  professional  politicians,  are 
taught  the  most  debasing  practices  of  corrupt  politics, 
have  their  political  morals  debauched,  and  their  political 
ideals  prostituted. 

No  matter  how  grave  and  ill-fated  these  conditions 
may  be ;  no  matter  how  great  the  failure  of  an  old  nomi- 
nating institution, — the  con-  ention ;  no  matter  how  diffi- 
cult the  remedy  may  seem,  "strengthen  thine  heart  and 
be  of  good  cheer."  There  is  no  cause  for  despondency 
and  much  reason  for  hope.  There  is  good  gi-ound  for 
faith  in  the  American  people,  in  their  past  achieve- 
ments, in  their  near  success,  in  their  wisdom,  their  in- 
telligence, their  ingenuity,  their  practical  turn  of  mind. 
Confidence  gives  them  great  power  and  independence. 


The  Corrupt  Convention.  65 

TTiej  will  experiment  where  reason  approves,  and  adopt 
where  experiment  confirms.  Theirs  is  the  material  for 
good  popular  government,  for  they  desire  good  govern- 
ment. We  fail  to-day,  where  we  deny  the  people  their 
own.  Create  institutions  which  will  maintain  them  in 
power,  and  success  must  follow. 

REFERENCES. 

Bryce,  James.    American  Commonwealth.    Vol.  IL    1889. 

Cone,  S.  W.  Dangers  of  Conventions.  Democratic  Rev.,  Decem- 
ber, 1855,  p.  453. 

GODKiN,  E.  L.  Nominating  Conventions.  Nation,  June,  1869; 
also  April  13,  1876,  p.  240. 

Green,  G.  W.  Our  Nominating  Machines.  Atlan.  Mo.,  Septem- 
ber, 1883,  p.  823. 

Hoffman.  E.  F.  Reform  of  Delegate  System.  Penn  Mo.,  August, 
1881,  p.  602. 

Halstead,  Mtjrat.  Our  National  Nominating  Conventions.  Cos- 
mopolitan, June,  1892,  p.  507. 

Johnston,  Alexander.  Nominating  Conventions.  Amer.  CycL 
of  Pol.  Sci. 

La  Follette,  R.  M.  Menace  of  the  Machine.  Chicago  Univer- 
sity Record,  February  22,  1897;  also  Michigan  University, 
March  12,  1898. 

Sulzberger,  M.  Nominations  for  Public  Office.  Penn  Mo.,  March, 
1881,  p.  177. 

Corrupt  Conventions.    Outlook,  December  8,  1900,  p.  398. 

The  American  Party  Convention.    New  Princeton,  July, 

1888. 


CHAPTEK  VI. 

PROPOSED  AND  APPLIED  METHODS  OF  NOMINA- 
TION. 

It  is  evident  that  our  nominating  system  has  degener- 
ated. There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  patient  is  seriously 
ill.  To  the  rescue  there  have  come  and  there  continue 
to  come  self-summoned  physicians,  as  well  as  surgeons 
elect.  All  examine  for  symptoms  and  suggest  remedies. 
But  the  symptoms  vary  with  the  localities,  and  with  the 
party  affiliations  and  political  theories  of  the  examiners. 
As  a  result  the  proposed  remedies  have  little  more  in 
common  than  the  purpose  of  producing  something  better. 
They  may,  however,  be  classified  under  two  general 
heads:  those  which  profess  to  cure,  and  those  which 
aim  to  kill.  Those  which  propose  to  retain  our  present 
system  and  correct  the  evils  in  it,  and  those  which  con- 
template its  destruction  or  abolition  and  the  substitution 
therefor  of  a  new  system. 

Even  if  it  were  within  the  writer's  power  it  would 
probably  be  impracticable  to  enter  upon  a  discussion  of 
all  the  different  methods  and  schemes  which  have  been 
proposed  or  tried  in  the  endeavor  to  overcome  the  evils 
in  our  nominating  institutions.*  Only  a  few  of  the 
more  important  ones  will  be  touched  upon,  as  they  will 
be  sufficient  to  bring  out  the  main  elements  of  the  diffi- 
culty, and  aid  in  the  location  and  analysis  of  the  causes 
which  lie  at  its  base. 

» For  an  extended  study  of  such  remedies  see  "  Nominations  for  Elective 
Office,"  Part  IV,  by  Frederick  W.  Dallinger. 


Methods  of  Nomination.  C7 

Among  the  remedies  having  in  view  the  retention  of 
our  present  nominating  machinery  may  be  mentioned 
the  "subward"  scheme,  the  plan  of  proportional  and 
minority  representation,  and  the  legalii^ation  of  the 
caucus.  Each  of  these  methods  assimies  the  convention 
system  to  be  a  necessary  part  of  our  party  organization 
and  seeks  to  re-establish  the  people  in  power  by  perfect- 
ing the  machinery  through  which  the  representative 
principle  involved  is  put  in  operation,  without  in  any 
way  destroying  its  essential  features. 

The  "sub-ward"  scheme  ^  seeks  to  overcome  the  diffi 
culties  which  are  peculiar  to  city  nominations,  and 
which  are  largely  due  to  a  lack  of  acquaintance  of  the 
masses  with  the  candidates  and  their  consequent  ignor- 
ance as  to  the  merits  and  capacity  of  the  men  running 
for  office.  The  ordinary  ward  is  to  be  divided  into  a 
number  of  small  precincts,  each  to  send  delegates  to  a 
ward  convention,  which  would  in  turn  send  delegates  to 
a  county  convention.  This  scheme  is  based  upon  the 
principle  that  the  relative  acquaintance  of  the  people 
witliin  a  certain  geographical  unit,  increases  as  the  unit 
decreases  in  size.  In  other  words,  our  acquaintances 
are  most  numerous  around  our  homes.  The  closer  the 
circle  approaches  our  firesides  the  larger  is  the  propor- 
tion of  the  population  within  it  which  we  know.  It 
also  involves  the  principle  of  representation,  or  dele- 
gated authority.  What  was  already  a  double  election  is 
to  be  made  a  triple  election.  The  advantage  of  this  ar- 
rangement was  supposed  to  be  that  through  this  filter- 
ing of  popular  suffrage,  popular  feeling  would  be  con- 
siderably restricted,  while  it  was  expected  that  the  elec- 

» Forum,  January,  1887. 


68  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

tors  would  be  a  select  body,  of  Higher  intelligence  than 
the  masses,  and  hence  better  qualified  to  choose  the  public 
servants.  However  these  apparent  advantages  of  the 
scheme  were  entirely  disproven  by  practical  operation. 
It  is  enough  for  the  present  purpose  to  say  that  the  sys- 
tem was  long  in  use  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  and 
there  proved  a  complete  failure.^  In  that  city  each  ward 
was  divided  into  twenty  "election  divisions,"  each  divis- 
ion sending  one  delegate  to  a  "ward  convention,"  and 
each  "ward  convention"  electing  three  delegates  to  a 
county  convention. 

The  proportional  and  minority  representation 
schemes,  which  are  being  so  enthusiastically  urged  by 
small  bands  of  supporters,  can  only  indirectly  be  classed 
under  the  nomination  reform  schemes.  They,  however, 
join  very  readily  in  the  cry  for  better  representation  in 
our  nominating  institutions.^  It  is  true,  we  want  better 
representation,  but  this  we  cannot  get  by  merely  extend- 
ing the  riglit  thereto  to  minorities.  The  trouble  is  that 
those  of  us  who  belong  to  the  majority,  and  who  possess 
the  right  of  representation,  are  often  denied  its  exercise 
under  the  present  system.  What  we  need  is  a  change 
that  will  revive  the  power  of  a  dormant  right.  When 
this  has  been  accomplished,  and  minority  or  propor- 
tional representation  should  be  found  expedient  and 
wise,  the  "right  to  representation"  which  will  then  once 
more  possess  content,  meaning,  and  power,  may  also  be 

extended  to  minorities.    Before  that  day  comes,  minor- 

• 

>  Forum,  January,  1887,  p.  496. 

•Some  writers  hope  for  decided  improvements  over  present  conditions  of 
nomination  by  introducing  proportional  representation  within  the  party,  and 
thus  giving  "equal  effect  to  each  vote  cast  at  a  primary."  See  Remsen,  Pri- 
mary Elections,  p.  29. 


Methods  of  Nomination.  69 

ity  representation  is  a  farce, — an  empty  badge  of  de- 
mocracj.^  Let  us  first  place  in  power  the  brother  of  the 
majority  with  the  firm  assurance  that  he  will  not  for- 
get his  brother  of  the  minority.  The  primary  question 
involved,  therefore,  is  not  that  of  a  right,  for  that  is 
granted,  but  of  a  proper  method  for  the  exercise  of  that 
right.    We  have,  but  we  cannot  enjoy. 

As  to  the  schemes  of  minority  representation  them- 
selves, it  may  be  said  that  some  of  them  may  be  read, 
reread,  and  lingeringly  dwelt  upon  without  in  any 
alarming  way  endangering  one's  ignorance  as  to  their 
nature.  Many  are  so  complex  and  so  laboriously  studied 
that  it  is  safe  to  say  most  voters,  under  any  such  system, 
would  pass  to  their  graves  without  having  mastered 
even  its  first  details,  while  among  the  professional  poli- 
ticians there  would  arise  a  class  of  experts  who,  with  a 
full  knowledge  of  party  strength  and  of  possible  com- 
binations, would  bring  about  some  startling  results  in 
the  way  of  minority  representations.  Success  cannot  at- 
tend such  schemes,  for  complexity  and  indirectness  are 
the  difficulties  of  our  present  system.^  Before  any  such 
plan  can  be  safely  inaugurated,  it  is  necessary  to  rescue 
politics  from  political  combinations  and  "machine"  rule, 
which  thrive  upon  our  present  nominating  institutions.' 

Much  is  hoped  from  the  legalization  of  the  caucus. 
This  institution  is  declared  by  many  to  be  the  source  of 
all  evil,  because  of  its  extra-legal  position.    Hence  it  is 

1  Where  "machine"  politics  obtains  we  certainly  have  minority  representa- 
tion of  a  decidedly  pronounced  form. 

»  Some  comparatively  simple  schemes'  which  do  great  credit  to  their  origina- 
tors have  also  been  constructed. 

'  For  other  schemes,  such  as  the  multi-delegate  convention  plan,  and  the  se- 
lection of  delegates  by  lot,  see  Arena,  June,  1897;  and  for  the  first,  second  and 
third  choice  system,  see  Remsen  on  Primary  Elections. 


70  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

proposed  to  remedy  tlie  difficulties  by  giving  it  a  setting 
in  law,  and  so  thoroughly  surrounding  it  with  legal  safe- 
guards as  to  insure  its  proper  operation.  But  caucus  re- 
form is  idle.-^  While  thereby  some  of  the  "extenuating 
circumstances"  would  be  removed,  the  main  mark  would 
be  missed.^  In  the  previous  discussion  of  the  caucus 
and  the  convention  system,^  it  was  shown  that  while  the 
caucus  is  undoubtedly  the  source  of  some  of  the  evils  of 
modern  politics,  the  convention  which  follows  it  gives 
rise  to  many  more,  and  that  what  is  needed  is  a  simplifi- 
cation of  our  present  system  through  its  reconstruction 
upon  a  less  intricate  and  more  direct  plan.  As  in  com- 
plexity and  indirectness  there  is  weakness,  so  in  sim- 
plicity and  directness  there  is  strength. 

The  legalization  of  the  caucus  is  often  largely  a  sem- 
blance of  reform,  because  many  of  the  "reformers"  act 
under  false  pretenses.'*  That  the  so-called  "caucus  re- 
form" does  not  seriously  endanger  the  power  of  political 
combinations  is  manifest  from  the  increasing  corruption 
of  the  caucuses  or  primaries  in  spite  of  the  general  en- 
actment of  caucus  laws  throughout  the  country.  The 
main  machinery  which  forms  their  stronghold  remains 
untouched.  Hence  to  cater  to  the  growing  demand  for 
reform  tliey  encourage  caucus  laws,  and  thus  hope  to 
satisfy  the  popular  cry,  which  unsatisfied  might  lead 
to  a  thorough  and  complete  reform,  and  thus  to  their 
ultimate  destruction.'  "The  'machine,'  already  in  some 
instances  anticipating  the  danger  of  the  destruction  of 

•  Address  by  R.  M.  Ln  FoUette,  Chicago  University,  1890. 
»  Eaton  in  Cyclopedia  of  Pol.  Sci.,  Vol.  3,  p.  348. 

•  See  p.  41. 

•  Arena,  June,  1897,  p.  1014. 

•  Hofer,  E.,  American  Primary  System,  p.  58w 


Methods  of  Nomination.  71 

its  foundation,  under  the  mask  of  caucus  reform  is 
seeking  to  satisfy  public  interest  and  save  all  the  ele- 
ments of  the  caucus  essential  to  Machine'  manipulation 
and  supremacy."^  It  aims  to  preserve  enough  of  the 
body  to  save  the  soul.  It  reforms  so  that  it  may  con- 
tinue to  live. 

The  reforms  which  contemplate  the  abolition  of  the 
present  system,  aim  at  something  simpler  and  more  di- 
rect. Because  they  are  important  and  sweeping,  they  are 
often  stigmatized  as  radical  and  unreasonable.  Many  of 
them  have  been  tried  with  varying  success  under  widely 
different  conditions.  Several  of  them,  the  "Clark  sys- 
tem," the  scheme  of  the  "open  book,"  and  the  direct  pri- 
mary, will  be  reviewed. 

The  Clark  svstem  is  novel  and  untried,  and  unlike 
any  other.  It  has  been  for  a  number  of  years  enthusi- 
astically urged  by  Dr.  C.  C.  P.  Clark  of  Oswego,  New 
York.^  It  applies  to  municipal  elections  only.  Eegistra- 
tion  books  are  to  be  kept  open  for  one  week  beginning 
with  the  first  Monday  of  September.  The  names  of  all 
registered  voters  in  each  election  district  are  printed 
upon  separate  and  similar  cards,  and  placed  in  "panels," 
indiscriminately  mingled  together.  They  are  then 
drawn  out  one  by  one  by  the  city  clerk.  The  first  seventy 
names  thus  drawn  form  an  arbitrary  group  called  a  "pri- 
mary election  constituency."  The  next  seventy  names 
compose  a  similar  group,  etc.  In  this  way  all  the  voters 
of  an  election  district  are  divided  into  artificial  con- 
stituencies.   Each  voter  is  then  given  notice  through  the 

>  Address,  R.  M.  La  Follette,  Chicago  University,  1896. 

*  For  a  thorough  exposition  of  the  plan  and  for  an  elaborate  discussion  of  its 
advantages,  see  "  The  Machine  Abolished,"  which  came  from  the  originator's 
pen  in  1900. 


T2  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

mails  as  to  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  his  con- 
stituency for  the  purpose  of  choosing  an  "electoral  dele- 
gate." All  the  electoral  delegates  within  one  election 
district  form  what  is  called  a  "district  college  of  elect- 
ors." These  electors  must  meet  and  organize  within  one 
week  after  their  election,  and  are  empowered  bj  vote  of 
a  majority  of  all  members  to  appoint  "in  their  own  time 
and  manner"  the  aldermen  and  all  other  elective  officers 
chosen  in  the  wards.  Similarly  all  the  electoral  dele- 
gates chosen  in  the  city  form  a  "city  college  of  electors" 
with  the  power  "to  choose  and  appoint  the  mayor  and 
such  other  officers  of  the  city  at  large,  as  are  or  may  be 
by  law  elective,"  and  to  fix  the  salaries  of  all  elective 
officers.  Any  college  of  electors  may  be  called  together 
at  any  time  to  fill  a  vacancy  among  the  municipal  officers 
subject  to  it,  or  to  remove  any  officer  and  appoint  an- 
other. New  electoral  delegates  are  to  be  chosen  every 
three  years. 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  plan  does  away  with  our  per- 
manent primary  constituencies,  or  caucuses,  and  re- 
places them  by  arbitrary  groups  small  enough  to  deliber- 
ate together.  It  abolishes  all  city  elections,  destroys  all 
party  organizations,  and  substitutes  a  different  type  of 
convention.  Since  no  voter  can  forsee  to  what  particular 
group  he  will  belong,  previf^us  understajidings  and  or- 
ganizations under  "machine  control"  are  entirely  fore- 
stalled. The  delegates  are  chosen  in  calm,  secluded 
bodies,  and  exercise  their  powers  as  they  see  fit.  Every 
office  holder  retains  his  position  at  will  of  the  power 
which  appoints  him.  There  is  nothing  upon  the  face  of 
this  plan  which  stamps  it  with  absolute  failure.  It  is 
of  such  a  nature  that  its  trial  would  probably  not  in  any 


Methods  of  Nomination.  73 

way  be  fraught  with  serious  disaster.  However  the 
tremendous  powers  which  are  lodged  in  the  electoral 
colleges  would  expose  those  bodies  to  the  worst  influ- 
ences of  corrupt  politics.  Government  would  be  made 
largely  the  select  occupation  of  a  few,  removed  from  the 
thought  and  interest  of  the  masses,  and  brought  to  their 
attention  only  in  an  unimportant  fonn  once  in  every 
three  vears. 

The  "open  book  method"  contains  the  germs  of  the 
direct  vote  system,  and  was  tried  at  about  the  same  time 
that  direct  primaries  were  first  tried  in  Crawford  county, 
Pennsylvania.  The  New  York  Nation^  speaks  as  fol- 
lows concerning  this  plan:  "As  early  as  1868  a  new 
plan  for  getting  rid  of  caucus  nominations  was  tried  by 
the  Republican  party.  Among  the  Democrats  nomina- 
tions by  caucus  had  worked  reasonably  well,  because  tlie 
intelligence  and  morality  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
party  was  somewhat  low,  and  the  thinking  as  well  as  the 
management  being  done  mainly  by  leaders,  there  was 
little  difficulty  in  maintaining  strict  discipline.  But  the 
[Republican  party  was  the  party  of  great  moral  ideas 
whose  members  would  reason  about  things.  The  cau- 
cuses had  become  strongholds  of  corruption  and  intrigue, 
and  were  but  sparsely  attended.  In  this  predicament  the 
plan  of  keeping  open  books  in  which  any  Republican 
could  at  his  leisure  inscribe  his  own  name,  and  the  name 
of  the  candidate  of  his  choice  was  adopted,  and  turned 
out  fairly  successful."  Another  writer  says:  "The 
method  proposed  has  been  to  keep  open  books  in  which 
a  member  of  a  party,  at  his  leisure,  could  inscribe  his 
own  name  and  the  name  of  the  candidate  of  his  choice. 

>  July  2, 18G8. 


74  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

It  was  put  in  operation  in  Philadelphia  for  the  Repub- 
lican party.  The  result  was  disappointing ;  there  was  al- 
ways a  prior  caucus."  * 

This  method  possessed  some  of  the  essential  character- 
istics of  the  direct  vote  plan.  It  did  away  with  all  cau- 
cuses and  conventions  and  enabled  every  voter  to  cast  his 
ballot  directly  for  his  choice  without  the  intervention  of 
a  delegate  through  whom  his  voice  might  be  entirely 
lost.  The  main  difficulty  with  the  system  was  its  ex- 
treme informality,  and  the  absence  of  all  important  reg- 
ulations as  to  its  conduct,  whereby  too  much  leeway  was 
given  to  the  leading  spirits  in  the  party. 

The  direct  primary  which  occupies  the  foreground  in 
the  present  study  will  be  discussed  at  length  in  Parts  II 
and  III.  It  abolishes  all  caucuses  and  conventions,  and 
makes  every  voter  directly  responsible  for  the  way  in 
which  he  casts  his  nominating  vote.  The  wisdom  of 
adopting  such  a  system  at  once  raises  the  question  of  the 
advantages  and  disadvantages  of  direct  and  indirect 
nominations.  Some  of  the  advantages  of  the  latter  have 
already  been  briefly  suggested. ^  It  is  well  to  fix  in  mind 
the  essential  conditions  under  which  they  may  be  real- 
ized. If  the  impulsiveness  of  popular  feeling  is  to  be  re- 
strained, and  if  a  more  careful  and  enlightened  choice 
is  to  be  made  by  the  delega+e  than  would  be  possible  by 
the  voter,  the  delegate  must  go  to  the  convention  unin- 
structed.  He  must  be  absolutely  free  to  exercise  his 
judgment  as  he  sees  fit.  If  he  is  not  free,  if  he  is  bound 
by  instructions  to  vote  in  a  particular  way,  then  the 
main  advantages  of  indirect  over  direct  nominations  fall 

»  R.  H.  Dana,  Forum,  January,  1887.  *  See  p.  67. 


Methods  of  Nomination.  75 

awaj.  The  delegate  is  tlieii  nothing  but  a  "living  bal- 
lot" expressing  the  wishes  of  the  voter,  certain  and 
sure/  in  the  convention,  just  as  the  direct  primary  bal- 
lot does  so  in  black  on  white.  ^  Both  the  paper  and  the 
"human  ballots"  are  in  such  cases  but  mechanisms 
through  which  the  voter  directly  and  fixedly  exercises 
his  right  of  suffrage,  the  only  difference  being  that  while 
in  case  of  the  direct  primary  the  effect  of  his  vote  is 
known  when  the  primary  election  returns  are  made,  in 
case  of  the  convention  of  instructed  delegates  the  public 
cannot  know  of  the  outcome  until  after  their  meeting. 
In  such  cases  there  can  be  no  more  enlightened  choice, 
and  but  little  restraint  of  popular  feeling,  inasmuch  as 
the  decision  of  the  instructed  delegate  is  presumably  the 
decision  of  the  voter.  The  chances  of  a  violation  of  in- 
structions cannot  be  considered  as  an  argument  against 
this  point,  although  it  strikes  a  vital  blow  at  the  wisdom 
and  expediency  of  modern  instructed  delegate  conven- 
tions. 

It  follows  that  if  the  delegate  is  to  go  uninstructed  the 
voter  must  not  let  politics  get  into  his  choice,  but  must 
determine  his  ballot  by  a  private  estimate  of  the  capacity 
and  intelligence  of  the  man.  The  supposition  must  be 
that  he  will  not  occupy  his  thoughts  with  political  opin- 
ions and  measures,  or  political  men,  but  will  be  guided 
by  his  personal  respect  for  some  private  individual  to 
whom  he  will  give  a  general  power  of  attorney  to  act  for 
him.  His  object  must  be  to  choose  a  good  chooser, — one 
who  can  and  will  grapple  successfully  and  in  deference 

'  Obedience  to  instructions  is  assumed,  though,  as  will  be  shown  later,  they  are 
in  many  cases  violated,  and  hence  defeat  their  own  purpose. 

»  Report  of  National  Conference  on  Practical  Primary  Election  Keform,  p.  106. 
1898. 


76  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

to  the  voter's  wishes,  with  the  questions  of  nomination 
which  may  come  up  for  consideration. 

Such  an  exercise  of  the  suffrage  would  fail  to  encour- 
age public  spirit,  to  stimulate  public  interest,  and  to 
arouse  true  patriotism.  It  would  remove  politics  in  its 
most  salient  forms  beyond  the  sphere  of  the  large  body 
of  voters,  and  would  make  it  the  most  select  occupation 
of  the  few.  For  a  voter  to  take  any  interest  whatever  in 
merely  naming  the  worthiest  person  to  elect  another  ac- 
cording to  his  judgment,  implies  a  zeal  for  what  is  right 
in  the  abstract,  an  habitual  principle  of  duty  for  the 
sake  of  duty,  which  is  possible  only  to  persons  of  a 
rather  high  grade  of  cultivation,  who  by  the  very  posses- 
sion of  it  show  that  they  may  be,  and  deserve  to  be, 
trusted  with  political  power  in  a  more  direct  shape. -^ 

In  conclusion  we  may  therefore  say  that  if  the  main 
advantages  claimed  for  indirect  nomination  are  to  be 
realized,  the  delegate  must  act  unhampered  by  instruc- 
tions.^ There  arises  however  as  an  objection  to  this  the 
fact  that  a  healthy  interest  in  public  affairs  would  be 
dampened  or  destroyed.  If  on  the  other  hand  delegates 
are  instructed,  the  difficulty  just  mentioned  would  be 
overcome,  but  most  of  the  advantages  of  the  indirect  plan 
would  be  lost.  Besides  this,  the  "indirect"  nomination 
through  instructed  delegate?,  which,  as  has  already  been 
shown,  when  honestly  conducted,  is  practically  direct 
nomination,  possesses  num.erous  disadvantages  over  the 
simpler  plan  of  direct  nomination  by  a  primary  vote. 
Not  only  does  the  former  system  maintain  in  operation 
a  huge  and  intricate  convention  system,  involving  a 

'  MULs,  J.  S.,  Representative  Government.    1890. 

'  It  is  a  vrell-known  fact  that  the  instructing  of  delegates  is  common  at  the 
present  time. 


Methods  of  Nomination,  77 

great  expenditure  of  money,  and  a  heavy  loss  of  time 
and  energy,  but  in  addition  to  this  it  is  not  as  safe  a 
plan.  There  will  always  exist  the  possibilities  of  a 
violation  of  instructions  through  wilful  disobedience, 
or  through  bribery  or  corruption,  which  would  in  every 
case  defeat  the  operation  of  the  scheme.  How  great 
these  possibilities  are  has  already  been  indicated  in  the 
discussion  of  the  convention  system.^ 

Trom  the  point  of  view  of  the  voter's  intelligence 
the  direct  nomination  plan  also  presents  a  very  favor- 
able aspect.  The  voter  who  can  cast  an  intelligent  bal- 
lot for  each  of  many  classes  of  delegates  and  vote  for 
men  who  may  safely  be  trusted  with  the  free  choice  of 
candidates  unhampered  by  instructions,  possesses  suffi- 
cient intelligence  to  exercise  that  choice  directly.  Not 
that  he  might  not  make  mistakes,  but  that  these  would 
not  be  as  serious  in  their  final  consequences,  and  would 
not  misrepresent  his  actual  intentions  and  wishes  to  as 
great  a  degree  as  would  the  delegates  whom  he  might 
select,  or  rather  who  would  be  selected  for  him  through 
"machine"  influence, and  who  would  be  subjected  to  the 
many  corrupting  powers  which  modern  politics  pro- 
vide. 

What  we  need,  therefore,  is  a  system  of  nomination 
which  will  re-establish  the  people  in  power  and  enable 
them,  not  to  govern,  but  rather  to  choose  those  who  shall 
govern  for  them.  Such  an  arrangement  would  not 
place  our  institutions  and  our  government  at  the  mercy 
of  the  "unruly  and  ignorant  masses,"  but  it  would  re- 
move them  beyond  the  control  of  selfish,  unscrupulous, 
and  despotic  political  combinations,  and  put  them  into 

>  See  pp.  68-63. 


78  Caucus  and  Convention  System. 

the  hands  of  an  energetic  people,  highly  interested  in 
their  own  welfare,  generally  sympathetic  with  the 
deeper  principles  of  humanity,  and  hopeful  in  the  prom- 
ises of  a  bright  future, — for  such  we  Americans  are. 

In  this  country,  where  the  average  intelligence  of  the 
population  is  high,  the  general  judgment  of  the  masses 
as  expressed  at  the  polls,  always  strikes  somewhere  near 
to  the  truth,  and  is  a  result  of  considerable  reliance. 
It  is  true  we  have  a  limited  number  of  ignorant  voters 
who  must  be  taken  into  accoTLnt,  and  whose  opinion 
clouds  and  vitiates  the  best  judgment  of  some  of  the 
more  enlightened  at  the  polls.  This  is  a  very  unfor- 
tunate condition,  but  it  is  an  equally  natural  one.  In 
a  republic  like  ours,  the  lower  classes  can  no  more  be 
eliminated  than  they  can  be  ignored.  They  must  be 
listened  to,  and  reckoned  with.  Certainly  they  are  as 
well  qualified  to  vote  at  a  primary  as  at  a  general  elec- 
tion. They  possess  sufficient  consciousness  of  their  in- 
dividual importance  and  rights  to  resent  disfranchise- 
ment with  a  rebellious  spiri^t,  which  might  lead  to  seri- 
ous complications  in  government  and  threaten  the  peace 
of  the  country.  While  the  restriction  of  political  rights 
to  the  more  educated  classes  might  be  highly  desirable, 
it  would  be  inconsistent  with  our  democratic  spirit,  and 
would  subvert  the  basic  piinciples  of  government,  by 
establishing  an  educational  aristocracy,  limited  in  num- 
bers, and  free  to  follow  the  interests  and  prejudices  of  its 
own  class,  with  the  attending  danger  of  degenerating 
into  a  plutocracy  through  lust  of  power  and  wealth. 

This  it  must  be  admitted  is  largely  speculation,  for 
we  shall  undoubtedly  continue  to  move  on  as  we  have 
in  the  past,  not  as  a  class,  but  as  a  people, — a  people 


Methods  of  Nojiiination.  79 

who  are  not  all  wise,  nor  all  ignorant,  but  wlio  are  more 
wise  than  ignorant,  and  who  will  ever  seek  to  mould 
their  institutions  so  as  to  minimize  the  evils  of  ignor- 
ance, and  to  strengthen  the  cause  of  wisdom,  by  re- 
specting the  rights  of  e\^ery  man  and  giving  him  a  voice 
and  a  hearing  as  long  as  his  ideas  do  not  threaten  the 
public  welfare,  though  ultimately  he  may  be  overruled. 
In  this  way  the  best  results  of  republican  principles  are 
attained.  All  are  heard,  but  the  greater  numbers  rule. 
All  are  free  to  express  their  opinions,  all  are  satisfied, 
but  the  result  is  a  fusion,  a  combination,  which  repre- 
sents the  best  that  we  as  a  people  can  do.  We  all  err, — 
the  wise  man  as  well  as  the  fool,  the  radical  as  well  as 
the  conservative,  but  we  do  not  all  err  in  the  same  di- 
rection. The  wise  man's  weakness  may  be  the  fool's 
strength.  The  impetuous  temper  of  the  radical  is  re- 
strained by  the  slow,  keeping  qualities  of  the  conserva- 
tive, while  the  plodding,  impeding  spirit  of  the  con- 
servative receives  a  healthy  stimulus  from  the  uncurbed, 
progressive  leaps  of  the  radical.  Each  is  a  helpmate 
to  the  other. 

If,  then,  we  can  create  and  maintain  Institutions 
which  will  secure  the  happy  blending  of  ignorance  and 
wisdom,  the  predominance  of  the  latter  will  insure  to  us 
the  best  results  possible  at  the  present  stage  of  democ- 
racy. And  if  we  can  evolve  nominating  institutions 
which  will  give  each  of  us  a  positive  vote,  conditions 
will  have  been  considerably  improved,  for  while  gov- 
ernment by  the  best  of  us  is  better  than  government  by 
the  rest  of  us,  the  rest  of  us  cannot  be  ignored;  and 
government  by  all  of  us  who  are  interested  in  our  own 
affairs,  is  better  than  government  by  a  few  of  us  who 


80  Caucus  and  Convention  System, 

have  combined  in  power  for  gloiy  and  private  gain,  and 
who  overlook  the  public  welfare  in  a  selfish  search  after 
personal  ambitions.  In  brief,  it  is  better  to  have  the 
people  in  power  than  to  have  tlie  "machine"  in  power. 

REFERENCES. 

Brown,  J.  W.     Representative  Government.     1899. 

BucKALEW,  Charles  R.     Proportional  Representation.     1873. 

Clark,  C.  C.  P.    The  Machine  Abolished.     1900. 

Commons,  John  R    Proportional  Representation.    1896. 

Cree,  Nathan.    Direct  Legislation,  eh.  XXIV.     1892. 

Dallinger,  Frederick  W.  Nominations  for  Elective  OflBce. 
1897. 

Field, .    Representation  of  Minorities. 

Field,  David  Dudley.  Some  Reprehensible  Practices  of  Amer- 
ican Government.     New  York,  1896. 

Hare,  Thomas.    Minority  Representation  in  Europe.    1870. 

La  Follette,  Robert  M.  Menace  of  the  Machine.  Chicago 
University  Record,  February  22,  1897;  also  address  before 
Michigan  University,  March  12,  1898. 

Mills,  John  S.  Consideration  on  Representative  Government 
1890, 

Remsen,  Daniel.    Primary  Elections.     1894. 

Sterne,  Simon.    Personal  Representation.     1867. 

Sterne,  Simon.    Representative  Government.     1869. 

Tyson,  Robert.    Representative  Government.     1898. 

Legal  Disfranchisement.    Atlan,  Mo.,  April,  1892,  p.  542. 

Slaying  of  the   Gerrymander.     Atlan.   Mo.,   May,   1892, 

p.  678. 

Substitutes  for  the  Caucus.    Forum,  January,  1887,  p.  491. 

Substitutes  for  the  Caucus.    New  Englander,  October, 

1875,  p.  734. 

The  Open  Book  Method.    Nation,  July  2,  1868,  p.  4. 

Legalization  of  Caucuses.     Nation,  February,  1869,  p.  86. 


PAET  II 


DIRECT  PRIMARY  LEGISLATION  IN 
THE  UNITED  STATES 


CHAPTEK  I. 

THE   MOVEMENT   FOR  BETTER   PRIMARIES. 

The  development  of  the  cancus  and  convention  sys- 
tem, from  an  institution  purely  democratic  and  repre- 
sentative in  character,  to  one  largely  undemocratic, 
con'upt,  and  "machine-ridden,"  has  already  been 
sketched.  This  change,  it  has  been  indicated,  came 
about  through  the  inability  of  our  political  system  to 
withstand  the  many  powerful  and  corrupting  forces 
which  the  tremendous  development  of  our  industries, 
and  the  concentration  of  wealth  and  population  brought 
into  play.  The  struggle  for  power  which  accompanied 
this  development  was  carried  into  every  field  of  activity, 
and  nowhere  was  success  greater  than  in  the  field  of 
politics,  where  the  "boss"  and  "machine"  even  in  the 
earlier  days  of  the  Republic  established  their  strong- 
holds. 

Opposition  to  this  tendency  toward  one-man-power 
in  politics  naturally  developed  immediately,  and  numer- 
ous attempts  were  made  to  stay  its  progress.  Some  of 
these,  which  have  already  been  discussed,  were  found 
to  have  been  more  or  less  failures;  but  there  remains 
one  which  in  scope  and  character  far  outstrips  all  others, 
and  which  bids  well  to  successfully  solve  the  problem. 
This  is  the  reform  of  the  primary  through  the  institution 
of  a  system  of  direct  vote  which  in  its  complete  form 
entirely  abolishes  all  caucuses  and  conventions,  and  re- 
places them  by  primary  elections  held  upon  the  same 


8i  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

basis  as  general  elections,  and  enabling  eacLi  voter  to 
directly  express  his  choice  for  any  candidate,  delegate, 
or  party  committeeman,  by  means  of  a  primary  election 
ballot  around  which  all  the  safeguards  of  the  Austral- 
ian ballot  system  have  been  throT\Ti. 

This  movement  for  better  primaries  had  its  origin  al- 
most half  a  century  ago,  and  in  1866  found  its  first  leg- 
islative expression  through  the  enactment  of  a  very  im- 
perfect statute  in  California  which  regulated  the  method 
of  selecting  delegates,  and  threw  a  few  safeguards 
around  primary  meetings.  In  1868  the  Crawford  county 
system  was  inaugurated  in  Pennsylvania,  and  in  1871, 
and  1872,  the  Pennsylvania  legislature  passed  local  acts 
regulating  the  direct  primaries  in  a  most  imperfect  man- 
ner. From  then  on,  primary  legislation  of  all  sorts  has 
been  continually  on  the  increase,  a  special  stimulus  hav- 
ing been  received  through  the  inauguration  of  the  Aus- 
tralian ballot  system. 

The  primaiy  reform  is  closely  related  to  the  Austral- 
ian ballot  reform,  both  being  part  of  the  general  reform 
of  our  election  machinery,  for  the  election  of  an  officer 
may  be  looked  upon  as  beginning  with  his  nomination  in 
the  party  caucus,  or  with  the  selection  of  delegates  to  a 
nominating  convention.  Both  reforms  aim  at  an  im- 
provement of  these  two  steps  in  the  process  of  election, 
and  while  the  movement  for  better  primaries  was  of 
earlier  origin  than  that  for  a  better  ballot,  the  latter  was 
the  first  to  be  successfully  completed.  It  was  accom- 
plished in  about  one  decade,  from  1882  to  1892,  and 
resulted  in  the  purification  of  the  general  elections 
through  their  legalization,  and  their  removal  from  party 
control,  by  placing  them  within  the  pale  of  the  law^ 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  85 

thereby  making  them  public  institutions,  through  which 
every  voter  was  enabled  to  cast  a  secret  and  independent 
ballot  for  the  candidate  who  had  been  nominated.  Like 
the  impulse  that  gave  us  a  better  ballot,  the  primary 
reform  movement  is  spontaneous  and  widespread ;  there 
is  the  same  rising  of  the  body  electorate,  which  several 
decades  before  had  cried  for  better  elections ;  there  is 
the  same  progressive  movement  for  something  better, 
and  the  same  willingness  on  the  part  of  progressive  legis- 
lators to  give  statutory  expression  to  the  popular  de- 
mand. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  important  differences, 
which  not  only  make  the  primary  reform  more  uncer- 
tain, but  more  difficult.  The  primary  problem  is  with- 
out extended  solution  in  any  part  of  the  world.  More 
than  that,  it  is  distinctively  a  question  of  American 
politics.  Nowhere  beyond  this  country  can  the  finger  of 
experience  be  placed  to  indicate  a  sure  way  out  of  all 
the  difficulties  that  surround  our  modem  primaries.  In 
case  of  the  election  reform,  which  required  a  system 
based  on  formal  registration,  and  which  guaranteed  a 
secret  ballot  and  an  honest  count,  it  was  but  necessary  to 
copy  the  statutes  of  Australian  legislators.  There,  in 
the  land  of  the  kangaroo,  the  problem  had  already  been 
solved,  and  experience  could  point  with  certainty  to 
success  wherever  the  system  might  be  adopted. 

Moreover,  before  our  ballot  laws  went  into  effect,  the 
system  of  electing  officers  was  practically  uniform 
throughout  the  land,  and  a  uniform  remedy  could  be  ap- 
plied, while  our  caucus  systems,  the  notices  required,  the 
officers  chosen,  the  manner  of  choosing,  the  test  of  party 
affiliations,  the  qualificaiions  for  participation,  vary  not 


86  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

merely  from  Stat©  to  State,  but  from  city  to  city,  and 
sometimes  even  from  village  to  village.^  Each  State  lias 
its  avra.  peculiar  convention  system,  wliich  resembles  that 
of  its  neighbor  only  along  general  principles.  Registra- 
tion laAvs  and  constitutional  provisions  vary  widely.  In 
Pennsylvania  there  is  no  registration  whatever ;  in  Mas- 
sachusetts voters  register  but  once  every  ten  years ;  while 
in  many  States  annual  registration  is  required.  Hence 
a  national  law  is  out  of  the  question,  while  state  laws 
must  be  modeled  to  the  political  institutions  and  con- 
ditions of  the  particular  States  in  which  they  are  to 
operate. 

The  politician  is  more  vitally  affected  by  the  primary 
reform  than  he  was  by  the  ballot  reform.  While  the 
latter  deprived  him  of  a  prosperous  field  of  work,  it  left 
open  the  largely  unworked,  and  important  field  of  nom- 
ination. Previously  his  efforts  had  been  largely  directed 
toward  the  election,  because  it  offered  a  most  convenient 
and  immediate  means  of  achieving  his  purposes.  Hence 
while  he  resisted  the  Australian  ballot  reform,  the  cau- 
cus and  the  convention  still  remained  open  to  a  success- 
ful occupation.  But  now  the  primary  reform  is  to  oust 
him  from  his  last  stronghold.  Beyond  its  bounds  his 
future  looks  dark.  To  deprive  him  of  the  caucus  and 
convention  sj^stem,  means  co  deprive  him  of  his  most 
fertile  field  of  operation.  Hence,  while  he  deceivingly 
professes  a  most  lamentable  ignorance  "of  those  endless, 
new-fangled  devices  for  the  destruction  of  individual 
liberty,"  called  direct  primary  laws,  he  is  fully  aware  of 
their  import,  and  diligently  strews  the  way  of  the  re- 
former with  stumbling  blocks,  based  upon  false  appeals 

>  Remsen,  Primary  Elections,  p.  39;  also  p.  48. 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  87 

of  liberty,  and  raised  under  the  mask  of  public  opinion 
and  popular  sentiment. 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  will  probably  be  clear 
why  there  is  diversity  in  the  direct  primary  laws  pro- 
posed or  enacted  in  the  different  States.  The  absence 
of  a  single  positive  remedy  leaves  room  for  wide  specu- 
lation ;  the  impossibility  of  national  regulation  of  nom- 
inating systems  for  purely  state  offices,  leaves  the  sub- 
ject exclusively  to  the  States,  hence  each  State  must 
enact  its  own  primary  laws ;  the  methods  of  "machine" 
opposition  are  endless,  and  call  for  all  kinds  of  com- 
promises; the  caucus  and  convention  systems  are  not 
alike;  party  customs  differ  widely;  the  constitutional 
requirements  respecting  "elections  authorized  by  law" 
are  peculiar  to  each  State;  registration  laws  are  dis- 
similar; and  sectional  ideas  of  proper  laws,  divergent. 
For  all  these  reasons  the  primary  election  laws,  which 
have  come  up  for  consideration,  have  differed  widely 
even  in  some  essential  features.  To  say  that  one  or 
the  other  of  these  laws  must  necessarily  be  a  failure  sim- 
ply because  it  happens  to  differ  from  its  neighbor,  is 
to  utterly  ignore  the  practical  requirements  of  the  polit- 
ical situation  in  the  different  States. 

We  may  now  turn  to  some  specific  evidence  of  the 
growth  of  primary  reform, — to  that  most  excellent  and 
permanent  time-keeper  of  progress,  the  statute  book. 
After  the  successful  inauguration  of  the  Australian  bal- 
lot system,  it  was  found  that  the  evils  in  our  election 
machinery  had  been  but  partially  remedied.  While  the 
voter  was  free  to  cast  his  ballot  as  he  chose  at  the  general 
election,  it  was  still  possible,  and  often  happened,  that 
the  man  for  whom  he  had  to  vote  was  placed  upon  the 


88  Direct  Primary  Legislation,. 

ticket  in  spite  of  his  "unpopularity  by  a  "machine-con- 
trolled" caucus  or  convention.  This  is  very  generally 
the  case  at  the  present  time,  and  as  long  as  our  defective 
nominating  machinery  continues,  we  can  unfortunately 
but  partially  enjoy  the  advantages  which  the  Australian 
ballot  system  would  otherwise  insure.  The  ballot  re- 
form needs  the  primary  reform  to  complete  it.  The 
vital  question  is,  what  sort  of  a  reform  shall  it  be  ?  At- 
tempts have  been  made  in  many  directions.  Reform  cau- 
cus laws  have  been  enacted  in  great  numbers  throughout 
the  country.  In  character  they  have  differed  widely. 
In  operation  they  have  been  chiefly  failures,  for  in  spite 
of  these  laws  our  caucuses  and  our  primaries  have  grown 
more  corrupt  and  our  conventions  more  "machine- 
ridden." 

The  main  reasons  for  this  condition  of  affairs,  have 
already  been  discussed  under  the  head  of  "political 
combinations."  It  was  seen  that  the  power  of  "ma- 
chines" and  "bosses"  is  rapidly  increasing  throughout 
the  country,  wherever  wealth  and  population  are  con- 
centrated, even  extending  its  baneful  influences  into  tlie 
i-ural  districts.  Disgust  with  "machine-controlled"  gov- 
ernment has  increased  the  stay-at-home  vote  to  discour- 
aging proportions.^  In  addition  to  this,  through  the 
institution  of  the  Australian  ballot  system  the  tremend- 
ous corrupting  forces  which  had  been  concentrated  at 
the  general  elections,  were  forced  to  find  other  fields, 
and  naturally  were  transferred  to  our  nominating  ma- 
chinery, where  they  found  fruitful  soil  in  the  extra-legal 
caucus  and  the  party  nominating  convention.  There 
was  nodiing  to  op^joso  them  here,  and  so  they  boldly  en- 

1  See  p.  43. 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  89 

tered  that  sacred  citadel  of  riglits,  in  which  were  en- 
shrined the  caucus  and  the  convention, — those  party  in- 
stitutions, which  opponents  of  reform  claimed  the  hand 
of  law  might  not  touch  without  infringing  upon  the 
proper  liberties  of  the  political  parties. 

What  more  could  the  "machine"  wish  for  its  protec- 
tion than  the  cover  of  this  false  notion  of  the  political 
liberty  of  parties  ?  Should  a  legislature  perchance  be 
bold  enough  to  attempt  the  passage  of  a  good  primary 
law,  which  would  take  the  politician  off  his  feet,  all  that 
he  needs  to  do  is  to  set  every  "ward-heeler"  and  cor- 
rupt demagogue  to  wringing  his  hands  and  to  crying  out 
to  deluded  crowds  of  party  men  that  their  liberties  are 
being  destroyed ;  that  the  party  of  their  affiliation  is  on 
the  verge  of  being  shackled  by  a  despotic,  reform  legis- 
lature ;  that  the  time  is  there  to  act  and  to  oppose.  Such 
ruses,  experience  has  shown,  have  frequently  met  with 
temporary  success.  Even  to-day  we  find  that  false  no- 
tion of  liberty  befuddling  the  minds  of  many  men  who 
oppose  the  movement  for  better  primaries,  and  the  en- 
actment of  comprehensive  and  complete  primary  laws 
which  give  our  political  parties  a  thorough  legal  setting, 
as  an  encroachment  upon  the  liberties  of  the  parties, 
and  upon  the  rights  of  their  members. 

Under  cover  of  such  ideas  corruption  prospered  in 
the  convention,  as  well  as  in  the  primary.  Where  pri- 
mary laws  were  passed,  they  frequently  merely  legalized 
the  action  of  the  primary,  and  thus  clothed  the  rules  and 
regulations  of  the  party  which  controlled  such  action, 
with,  the  power  of  law.  Whether  under  such  conditions 
the  primary  was  improved,  depended  upon  the  rules 
prescribed  for  its  conduct ;  whether  the  rules  were  good 


90  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

or  bad,  depended  upon  the  authoTity  whicli  made  them. 
Wherever  party  organization  was  in  the  hands  of  politi- 
cal combinations,  and  '"'bosses/'  and  this  was,  and  is, 
the  case  in  most  of  our  cities,  and,  indeed,  in  many  rural 
districts,  the  rules  were  bad^  and  aimed  at  the  protection 
of  the  corrupted  power  which  made  them.  Legislation 
of  this  more  or  less  imperfect  character  was  put  upon  the 
statute  books  of  California,  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Ohio,  and  Pennsylvania  before  1880.  Only  the  local 
acts  of  Pennsylvania  of  1871  and  1872,  concerned  them- 
selves with  direct  primaries.  Not  imtil  1880  was  there 
further  legislation  upon  this  subject.  In  that  year  a 
new  landmark  was  set  in  direct  primary  legislation 
through  the  enactment  of  an  optional  law,  applying  to 
the  counties  of  Harrison,  Bourbon,  Campbell,  and  Ken- 
ton of  Kentucky. 

Prom  1880  to  1890  optional  direct  primary  laws  were 
enacted  in  Nevada,  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  Neb- 
raska, while  a  compulsory  system,  the  first  of  its  kind, 
was  inaugurated  in  Missouri,  in  the  city  of  St.  Louis, 
for  the  nomination  of  all  officers,  and  the  election  of 
delegates  within  the  city  to  conventions  representing 
areas  beyond  its  limits.  During  the  early  part  of  this 
decade  a  unique  party  system  of  direct  primaries,  known 
as  the  Kansas  ropresentati  /e  vote  system  of  direct  nom- 
ination, was  established  in  Jackson  county,  Kansas. 
In  addition  to  this,  primary  election  laws  aiming  to 
regulate  caucuses  and  conventions  were  also  passed  in 
Connecticut,  N^rth  Dakota,  Ohio,  Colorado,  Delaware, 
Georgia,  Maine,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  New  York,  Mas- 

'  Tammany  organization  of  New  York  is  the  most  notorious  illustration  of  this 
kind. 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  91 

sachusetts,  Sontli  Carolina,  Illinois,  and  Indiana.  The 
primaries,  however,  continued  to  grow  worse,  and  more 
thorough  steps  were  urged.  Two  main  remedies  were 
suggested:  the  application  of  the  Australian  ballot  sys- 
tem of  voting  to  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions, 
and  in  the  nomination  of  local  officers;  and  the  plan 
which  had  already  been  tried  in  the  South,  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, Kentucky,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Kansas,  and  elsewhere, 
which  required  the  abolition  of  all  conventions  through 
the  institution  of  a  system  of  direct  nomination,  where- 
by every  voter  directly  cast  his  ballot  for  the  candidate 
of  his  choice  for  each  and  every  office  that  was  to  be 
filled. 

Between  1890  and  1895,  the  former  plan  of  improv- 
ing the  method  of  selecting  delegates  through  remedial 
legislation  was  inaugurated  in  optional  but  imperfect 
form  in  Washington,  and  compulsory  in  California, 
Massachusetts,  and  Oregon.  The  California  act,  passed 
in  1895,  was  quite  thorough  and  applied  to  coimties  of 
the  first  and  second  class.  The  Massachusetts  caucus 
law  of  1894  was  compvilsory  and  applied  to  the  entire 
State,  with  certain  special  compulsory  features  applying 
to  Boston  and  optional  for  the  rest  of  the  State.  It 
was  amended  in  1895  and  again  in  1896.  In  Kentucky 
the  other  plan, — that  of  the  direct  vote,  which  had  been 
established  in  that  State  in  1880,  was  further  developed 
through  the  passage  of  the  optional  direct  primary  law 
of  1892,  which  laid  the  foundation  for  the  present  well- 
known  system  of  optional  direct  primaries.  The  com- 
pulsory direct  primary  laws  of  Missouri  of  1889  and 
1891,  were  amended  in  1893  by  making  cities  of  one 
hundred  thousand,  instead  of  three  hundred  thousand 


92  .  Direct  Prvniary  Legislation. 

inhabitants,  subject  to  the  act.  Optional  direct  primary 
laws  were  also  passed,  or  amended,  before  1896  in  Vir- 
ginia, Georgia,  Mississippi,  and  Arkansas.  During  tbis 
period,  and  from  then  on,  a  large  and  rapidly  increasing 
mass  of  legislation,  dealing  with  the  indirect  primary 
or  caucus  assemblages,  was  enacted  in  many  of  the  States 
of  the  Union  with  uncertain  and  oftentimes  discourag- 
ing results.  Since  the  present  inquiry  does  not  propose 
to  concern  itself  with  legislation  of  this  nature,  it  may 
be  passed  by  with  a  mere  mention  of  its  existence. 

In  1896,  Virginia  and  South  Carolina  amended  their 
optional  direct  primary  laws,  while  the  Republican 
party  instituted  a  complete  party-regulated  direct  vote 
system  in  the  city  of  Lincoln,  Nebraska.  In  1897  an 
optional  direct  primary  law  was  put  upon  the  statute 
books  of  Florida,  and  an  amendment  passed  to  the  com- 
pulsory law  of  Missouri  requiring  a  declaration  of  party 
affiliation  in  all  cities  of  three  hundred  thousand  inhab- 
itants and  over.  In  California,  a  new  compulsory  law 
applying  to  the  entire  State  for  the  selection  of  delegates 
to  conventions,  was  enacted  in  the  hope  of  escaping  the 
unconstitutional  features  of  the  previous  law  of  1895. 
In  1898,  compulsory  laws  applying  the  xiustralian  bal- 
lot method  to  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions, 
were  passed  in  New  York  i.nd  Illinois.  In  Ohio,  where 
party  direct  primaries  had  been  in  use  for  many  years 
in  a  limited  way,  an  incomplete  law  was  also  passed  to 
correct  some  of  the  most  flagrant  abuses  which  had  de- 
veloped as  a  resvlt  of  the  extra-legal  position  of  the  direct 
vote  svstem. 

In  1899,  both  the  New  York  and  Illinois  laws  were 
superseded  by  new  laws,  which  are  still  in  force.     The 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  93 

Illinois  law  is  compulsoiy  for  the  selecting  of  delegates 
in  counties  having  a  population  of  one  hundred  twentj- 
five  thousand  or  over,  while  the  New  York  law,  which 
is  also  compulsory,  not  only  for  the  selection  of  dele- 
gates, but  also  for  the  nomination  of  officers,  empowers 
the  general  committee  of  the  party  in  cities  of  five  thou- 
sand inhabitants  and  over,  to  decide  just  what  conven- 
tion shall  be  held,  and  what  officers  shall  be  nominated 
by  direct  vote.  As  the  party  rulers  are  generally  op- 
posed to  direct  primaries,  this  is  a  scheme  of  legislation 
which,  while  it  bears  the  sign  of  promise  upon  its  face,  is 
really  a  mask  of  reform, — a  subterfuge  for  escape  from 
popular  control.  Besides  these  two  laws,  optional  direct 
primary  laws  were  also  enacted  in  Utah,  Alabama,  and 
Nebraska,  while  the  California  legislature  made  another 
attempt  to  meet  the  decision  of  the  supreme  court  of 
that  Stat>e,  by  passing  a  compulsory  law  applying  to 
the  entire  State,  abolishing  the  test  of  a  Ijona  fide  pres- 
eait  intention  of  supporting  the  party's  nominees  at  the 
next  election,  and  putting  in  its  place  the  "open  pri- 
mary" system.  The  year  1900  was  comparatively  un- 
important as  far  as  direct  primary  legislation  is  con- 
cerned. However,  Louisiana  enacted  its  first  law,  which 
is  optional,  and  New  York  amended  its  enrollment  sys- 
t-em  used  at  the  primary,  while  South  Carolina  substi- 
tuted party  registration  for  general  registration  as  a 
qualification  for  participation  in  the  primaries. 

We  now  come  to  the  year  just  passed,  1901,  which 
stands  unprecedented  in  the  general  and  thorough  agita- 
tion for  direct  primaries ;  in  the  favorable  acceptance  of 
the  reform ;  in  the  mmaber  of  carefully  drawn  bills  urged 
upon  the  legislatures  of  all  the  leading  States;  and  in 


94  Direct  Pri7nary  Legislation. 

the  number,  scope,  and  degree  of  completeness  of  the 
laws  that  were  enacted.  When  compared  with  that  of 
the  preceding  years,  the  progress  of  the  refonii  movement 
is  almost  phenomenal.  Bills  providing  for  the  nomina- 
tion of  all  officers  of  the  State  by  direct  vote,  were  in- 
troduced in  some  nineteen  of  the  leading  States,  includ- 
ing Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  Michigan,  Indiana,  Illinois, 
North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  Washington,  California, 
Oregon,  Montana,  Kansas,  Missouri,  Colorado,  New 
York,  New  Hampshire,  New  Jersey,  Maryland,  and 
Pennsylvania,  while  in  Ohio,  Tennessee,  and  Utah, 
there  was  considerable  interest  aroused,  and  bills  were 
framed  ready  to  be  submitted  to  the  legislatures.  This 
will  probably  be  done  at  their  next  sessions.  These 
States  comprise  by  far  the  most  important  part  of  this 
Union.  They  lead  in  every  branch  of  life.  They  repre- 
sent the  best  of  education,  and  of  progressive  thought. 
Their  wealth,  power,  and  influence  dominate  the  poli- 
cies of  the  Nation,  and  detemiine  the  administration  of 
its  greatest  Conmaonwealths.  The  direct  primary  move- 
ment is  hence  identified  with  what  is  strong,  progi'os- 
sive,  and  foremost  in  this  country. 

The  uniformly  wide  scope  of  the  bills  which  were  in- 
troduced is  quite  remarkable.  Almost  without  exception 
they  provided  for  systems  of  direct  primaries  far  in  ad- 
vance of  any  yet  put  in  operation.  They  were  generally, 
as  introduced,  compulsory  throughout  the  entire  State 
for  the  nomination  of  all  officers,  local,  county,  and 
state.  All  conventions  were  hence  to  be  abolished. 
Most  of  the  bills  provided  for  concuiTent  primaries  in 
which  party  registration,  or  upon  challenge,  some  formal 
test  of  party  affiliation,  was  required  for  participation. 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  95 

The  Australian  ballot  system  of  voting  was  incorporated 
in  most  of  the  bills,  as  far  as  consistent  with  the  other 
requirements,  and  all  general  election  laws  that  were  ap- 
plicable, were  extended  to  the  primaries. 

The  bills  invariably  encountered  strong  opposition 
from  the  ranks  of  those  who  had  been  identified  with 
professional  politics.  The  methods  resorted  to  ranged 
all  the  way  from  honest  attempts  at  persuasion  and  ar- 
gument to  the  vilest  abuses  of  money  and  morals.  "No 
stone  was  left  unturned."  Where  public  clamor  de- 
manded some  law,  "machine"  legislators  came  forward 
with  improvised  bills  of  their  own,  looking  quite  as 
effective  as  the  original  bills,  but  having  hidden  under 
their  innocent  phrasing  a  sufficient  number  of  loopholes 
to  permit  the  "bosses"  to  manipulate  their  "wires"  quite 
as  successfully  as  befora  A  good  illustration  of  the 
operation  of  such  a  law  is  found  in  that  of  Illinois  "un- 
der Avhich  there  has  never  been  a  conviction,  and  even 
only  one  indictment  which  held  water.  It  was  framed 
by  politicians  to  quiet  public  clamor."^  The  recent  un- 
successful struggle  in  Wisconsin,  in  which  the  "ma- 
chine" was  confronted  by  "no  compromise"  and  "un- 
conditional suiTender,"  is  a  striking  instance  of  the 
desperate  character  of  the  conflicts  which  were  engaged 
in.  Taken  all  in  all,  the  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin  was, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  writer,  the  best  of  its  kind  yet  pre- 
sented to  a  legislature.  It  was,  however,  defeated  by  a 
combination  of  the  regular  corporation  lobby,  the  Fed- 
eral officeholders  from  all  parts  of  the  State,  and  proba- 
bly the  largest  assemblage  of  political  "strikers"  which 
ever  assembled  at  the  capital. 

•  lusley,  Edward,  Arena,  June,  1897,  p,  1023. 


96  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

But  bj  no  means  all  the  bills  suffered  defeat  as  did 
tbe  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin.  In  Minnesota,  Oregon, 
California,  Indiana,  and  Michigan,  reform  was  ad- 
vanced, although  not  without  compromise.  The  Minne- 
sota law  stands  as  the  best  incorporation  of  the  princi- 
ple of  direct  primaries  jet  accomplished  and  put  in 
practical  operation.  It  is  compulsory,  and  applies  to  the 
entire  State  for  the  nomination  of  all,  except  state  offi- 
cers. The  Or^on  law,  which  has  recently  been  de- 
clared unconstitutional,  although  of  narrower  scope, 
ranked  a  close  second,  because  of  greater  perfection  than 
the  Minnesota  law  in  certain  important  features,  such 
as  the  provisions  for  the  maintenance  of  proper  party  or- 
ganization, and  for  the  promulgation  of  local  pLatforms. 
It  was  compulsory  for  the  nomination  of  all  officers 
within  the  county,  resembling  in  this  respect  the  Henne- 
pin county  law  of  Minnesota.  A  second  compulsory 
law  applying  to  all  cities  having  a  population  of  ten 
thousand  inhabitants  and  over,  for  the  selection  of  dele- 
gates to  conventions,  was  also  passed  in  Oregon  on  the 
day  preceding  the  passage  of  the  law  already  mentioned. 

The  California  law,  passed  duiing  the  last  session  of 
the  legislature,  is  also  compulsory,  and  applies  to  all 
cities,  and  cities  and  counties,  of  the  State  which  have 
a  population  of  seven  thousand  five  hundred  inhabitants 
and  over,  for  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions 
and  for  the  nomination  of  local  officers.  The  Indiana 
law  is  likewise  mandatory,  and  as  passed  applies  to  the 
Republican  and  the  Democratic  parties  in  Marion  and 
Vanderburgh  counties  for  the  conduct  of  all  their  pri- 
maries and  conventions.  It  presents  a  new  featiire  in 
that  it  provides  for  a  special  primary  for  the  election  of 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  97 

precinct  committee  men,  who  must  within  ten  days  after 
tlieir  election  decide  whether  the  party  candidates  are 
to  be  nominated  by  direct  vote,  or  by  delegate  convention. 
Hence,  while  the  law  is  mandatory  in  form,  it  makes  the 
adoption  of  the  direct  vote  system  optional.  In  Michi- 
gan a  "machine^controlled"  senate  defeated  all  the  com- 
prehensive bills  passed  by  the  assembly,  but  finally  per- 
mitted the  present  law  to  pass.  It  is  mandatory  for  the 
nomination  of  all  officers  within  the  city  of  Grand 
Rapids. 

These  laws  are  the  positive  results  of  reform,  but  they 
by  no  means  properly  represent  the  strength  of  the 
movement  in  the  different  States.  This  is  more  closely 
approximated  by  the  comprehensive  bills  which  were 
introduced  in  nineteen  of  the  foremost  States  of  the 
Union.  Throughout  the  coiuitry,  clubs  and  leagues  have 
been  formed  in  the  interests  of  direct  primaries.  All  the 
great  national  and  municipal  reform  organizations 
working  for  the  cause  of  better  government,  have  en- 
thusiastically identified  theonselves  with  this  progres- 
sive movement,  while  many  of  the  greatest  thinkers  in 
the  field  of  politics,  and  many  of  the  most  capable  men 
in  the  public  service,  have  approved  of,  and  are  actively 
promoting  the  reform.^ 

Illustrative  of  the  widespread  and  rapidly  growing 
sentiment  in  favor  of  primary  reform,  was  the  confer- 

'  Amongr  these  men  there  is  prohahly  none  more  deserving  of  special  distinc- 
tion than  Gov.  R.  M.  La  Follette  of  Wisconsin,  who  was  one  of  the  earliest  apos- 
tles of  the  movement.  For  consistent  denmiciation  of  "machine"  poUtics,  for 
deep  and  serious  study  of  the  direct  vote  system  as  a  remedy,  for  enthusiastic 
and  swayuig  appeals  to  the  people  in  behalf  of  nominations  through  their  direct 
choice,  for  a  persistent  exposition  of  the  specific  schpme  of  his  hopes,  for  fidelity 
to  the  reform,  and  for  faith  in  its  ultimate  victory,  Governor  La  Follette  prob- 
ably has  no  equaL 

7 


98  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

ence  on  primary  elections  held  in  New  York  in  1898. 
"The  idea  of  a  national  conference  on  primary  election 
reform  originated  with  the  Political  Committee  of  the 
Civic  Federation  of  Chicago.^  The  work  of  that  com- 
mittee in  behalf  of  municipal  reform  had  taught  it,  after 
four  years'  continuous  effort,  that  if  any  permanent  re- 
form were  to  be  secured,  it  must  be  through  the  puri- 
fication and  utilization  of  the  party  primaries."  ^  The 
need  of  "a  national  organization^  to  collect  information 
and  statistics  on  this  subject  for  the  education  of  the 
people  and  of  the  la^Mnakers,"  was  generally  felt,  and 
led  to  the  appointment  of  a  committee  which  issued  a 
call  for  a  meeting  in  the  city  of  New  York,  to  be  held 
on  January  20  and  21,  1898.  This  call  was  endorsed 
all  over  the  country  by  all  classes  of  people,  "including 
members  of  the  press,  governors,  congressmen,  members 
of  legislatures,  members  of  all  three  national  committees, 
presidents  of  labor,  municipal  reform,  church,  and  com- 
mercial organizations."  All  these  classes  were  repre- 
sented at  the  conference,  and  worked  energetically  to 
carry  out  its  purpose, — that  "of  "discussing  and  discov- 
ering as  far  as  possible  the  precise  defects  in  the  vari- 
ous systems  which  now  obtain,  and  their  remedies." 
The  addresses  and  the  ensuing  discussions  were  all  of 
an  eminently  practical  character,  and  confined  them- 
selves closely  to  the  purposes  of  the  conference.     The 

'  The  inspiration  through  which  this  movement  originated  was  probably 
largely  received  from  an  address  delivered  by  Governor  La  Follette  at  the  Uni- 
versity of  Chicago,  February  22,  1897.  This  address  appears  to  have  been  the 
first  noteworthy  pubhc  utterance  upon  the  subject  of  direct  primaries.  It  con- 
tained clearly-outlined  provisions  for  a  comprehensive  system  of  direct  nomina- 
tions, and  briefly  but  pointedly  presented  all  the  essential  features  of  a  good 
direct  primary  law. 

'  R.  M.  Kasley,  Secretary  of  Civic  Federation  of  Chicago. 

*  Edward  Inslcy,  in  Arena,  June,  1897;  also  John  L.  Hopkins,  in  Arena,  June,  1898. 


Movement  for  Better  Primaries.  99 

general  interest  aroused  by  this  conference,  and  the  fund 
of  information  on  the  status  of  the  primary  in  this  coun- 
try, which  was  given  to  the  public,  was  a  great  stimulus 
to  thought  and  action  along  the  line  of  primary  reform 
in  every  State. 

An  unprejudiced  consideration  of  the  facts  which 
have  been  presented  in  following  out  the  movement 
for  better  primaries,  will  support  the  view  that  it  is 
something  more  than  an  upstart  movement,  inaugurated 
by  a  few  "calamity  howlers,"  who  believe  that  they  fore- 
see the  end  of  democratic  government  in  an  approacliing 
despotism  of  one-man-power;  who  are  impatient  for 
something  new,  and  who  love  notoriety,  and  newspaper 
sensationalism.  Direct  primary  reform  is  neither  new, 
nor  radical,  nor  superficial.  Its  stream  flows  deep  and 
wide  and  issues  from  the  masses  of  the  people  who  have 
been  roused  to  action,  through  the  appeals  of  earnest 
men, — appeals  which  rest  upon  sound  principles,  which 
are  simple  and  easily  comprehended  by  the  public  mind. 
Direct  power  is  to  be  substituted  for  indirect  power. 
The  short  route  to  government  control  is  to  be  followed, 
instead  of  the  long.  The  evil  is  plain;  the  remedy  is 
simple ;  hence  the  populace  applauds,  supports  and  acts. 

Let  us,  however,  remember  that  after  all,  the  reform 
is  but  just  begum  Although  much  has  already  been  ac- 
complished, much  more  remains  to  be  done.  The  fniits 
of  the  Australian  ballot  system  are  as  yet,  ours  only  in 
part.  One  of  the  closest  students  of  this  system  tells  us, 
that  "just  so  long  as  we  continue  to  nominate  by  a  cau- 
cus, or  a  convention  so  long  must  we  fail  to  elect  the 
best  men,  for  our  hands  are  tied.  If  a  method  can  be 
found  by  which  all  men  can  be  given  political  equality 


100  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

before  the  law,  actually,  as  well  as  tteoretlcallj,  tlie 
evil  will  die  a  natural  death.  To  compress  the  issue 
roughly  into  a  phrase, — ^what  we  need  now  is  not  merely 
free  elections,  hut  free  nominations  also, — not  merely  a 
sincere  and  accurate  expression  of  opinion,  but  an  op- 
portunity to  nominate  and  to  vote  effectively  for  any  one 
whom  we  desire."  ^ 

But  while  much  still  remains  undone,  much  may  well 
be  expected  from  the  rapidly  growing  body  of  primary 
reformers.  Though  opposition  is  as  yet  strong  and  des- 
perate, the  forces  which  are  accumulating  throughout 
the  country  issue  distinctly  from  the  people,  and  will 
continue  to  broaden  the  way  and  give  the  new  reform 
better  trials.  It  is  true,  that  some  of  our  greatest  men, 
whose  opinions  we  respect,  denoimce  the  direct  vote  sys- 
tem, because,  as  they  claim,  it  is  "new,  untried,  popu- 
listic,  and  revolutionary,"  and  opens  up  an  untrod,  and 
more  or  less  uncertain  path.  But  may  it  not  be  replied, 
upon  the  basis  of  the  preceding  discussion,  that  while 
proper  conservatism  is  to  be  encouraged,  tliere  seems 
to  be  a  tendency  among  the  best  of  us  to  cling  to  the  old 
sheep-path,  and  jump  the  fence  at  the  risk  of  a  broken 
leg,  rather  than  break  a  new  path  through  an  open  gate, 
however  great  the  convenience  of  the  latter  may  be. 

The  "new  light"  which  observing  men  say  is  now 
breaking  upon  the  American  people,  is  certainly  not  lost 
upon  the  field  of  politics.  Theorization  is  yielding  to 
practical  experimentation.  The  cry  is  for  "facts,"  "re- 
sults," not  theory  and  logic.  The  argument  that  a  law 
is  now  or  untried  is  losing  in  weight.     Men  ever  grow 

•  Wigmore,  The  Australian  Ballot  System,  p.  84. 


Movement  for  Betier  Primaries.  101 

more  ready  to  experiment,  where  reason  sustains,  and 
to  adopt  where  experiment  confinns.  This  change  of 
sentiment  greatly  strengthens  the  position  of  the  advo- 
cates of  the  direct  vote  system,  and  opens  the  way  for  a 
free  and  impartial  test  of  proposed  schemes,  which  must 
ultimately  lead  to  a  successful  solution  of  the  primary 
problem.^ 

'  For  references,  see  close  of  chapter  XIII,  Part  Ul. 


CHAPTER  II. 

PRIMARY    LEGISLATION    IN    THE    NORTH    ATLANTIC 

STATES. 

Massachusetts. 

The  direct  vole  system  of  nomination  has  been  tried 
in  Boston  for  the  choice  of  candidates  for  membership 
in  the  common  council,  the  board  of  aldermen,  and  in 
the  lower  hou^e  of  the  legislature.  Chelsea,  a  neigh- 
boring city,  has  also  adopted  it  for  certain  officials.  In 
the  nomination  of  the  mayor,  a  half  way  direct  vote  sys- 
tem has  been  in  operation,  in  that  delegates  are  pledged 
beforehand,  and  every  voter  knows  just  for  whom  he 
votes,^  through  the  medium  of  the  pledged  delegate.  A 
strong  sentiment  has  been  aroused  in  the  State  for  an 
extension  of  the  plan.  In  1896  a  bill  was  introduced 
applying  the  direct  vote  principle  to  the  election  of  the 
board  of  aldermen.  It  was  defeated  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  "direct  voting  met  -with  universal  favor."  The  next 
year,  several  bills  had  this  provision  attached,  but  none 
passed  because  of  the  opposition  of  politicians.  In 
1898  a  more  comprehensiN  e  scheme  of  direct  primaries 
was  presented  to  the  legislature.  These  persistent 
efforts  at  reform  finally  prevailed  for  the  nomination  of 
certain  officers  in  Boston,  as  already  indicated.  The 
success  of  the  reform  in  this  city  speaks  well  for  a  fur- 
ther development  of  direct  nominations  in  Massachu- 
setts. 

>  See  p.  75. 


In  Massachuseiis.  103 

The  first  caucus  act  of  Massacliiisetts  was  passed  con- 
temporaneously with  the  Australian  ballot  act,  in  1888.-^ 
The  insistence  of  the  political  parties  upon  their  right 
to  manage  their  own  affairs  resulted  in  the  limitation  of 
the  act  to  a  few,  simple  provisions.  It  was  in  force 
throughout  the  entire  State  until  the  passage  of  the  act 
of  1894,  and  now  applies  only  to  minor  parties  casting 
less  than  three  per  cent,  of  the  votes  last  cast  for  gov- 
ernor. The  act  of  1894,^  which  will  be  briefly  reviewed, 
was  amended  in  1895  ^  in  the  light  of  one  year's  exper- 
ience, and  again  in  1896.  During  this  year  a  special  act, 
applying  only  to  caucuses  in  Boston,  was  also  passed. 
This  legislation  has  placed  Massachusetts  in  the  lead 
of  the  New  England  States  in  caucus  reform. 

As  elsewhere,  it  was  successful  experimentation  that 
led  to  the  reform  in  Massachusetts.  In  1889  a  Republi- 
can ward  of  Boston  tried  the  scheme  of  a  secret  Aus- 
tralian 'ballot  containing  the  names  of  those  candidates, 
who  had  been  presented  through  properly  filed  nomina- 
tion papers,  signed  by  at  least  ten  voters  of  the  party. 
It  was  successful,  and  early  in  1890,  the  Republican 
city  committee  extended  it  to  the  entire  city.  The  re- 
sults again  were  so  gratifying  that  an  effort  was  made  on 
part  of  the  Democratic  party  to  adopt  similar  rules. 
The  failure  of  this  attempt  led  to  the  combined  agita- 
tion of  both  parties  for  caucus  reform  through  legisla- 
tive enactment  with  the  result  that  the  system,  as  laid 
down  by  the  rules  of  the  Republican  party,  was  incor- 
porated in  the  caucus  law  of  1894,with  certain  general 

>  Session  Laws  of  Massachusetts,  1888,  p.  516. 
'  Session  Laws  of  Massachusetts,  1894,  p.  617. 
*  Session  Laws  of  Massachusetts,  1895,  p.  582;  also  p.  626. 


104  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

provisions  applicable  througlioiit  tlie  entire  State,  and 
special  provisions  compulsory  only  in  Boston.  This 
law  was  amended  in  1895  and  divided  into  two  separate, 
acts,  one  embracing  the  entire  State,  and  the  other  spe- 
cially formed  for  Boston. 

The  act  applying  to  all  political  parties  in  the  Com- 
monwealth, contains  provisions  for  the  popularization 
of  party  organization  by  requiring  all  parties  annu- 
ally to  elect  their  proper  and  necessary  party  commit- 
tees at  the  caucuses  held  for  the  nomination  of  officers. 
Certain  general  rules  are  also  laid  dowm  for  the  organi- 
zation and  government  of  these  committees,  although 
large  discretionary  powers  are  retained,  such  as  the  de- 
termination of  the  membership  of  the  party,  which 
hence  authorizes  a  party  enrollment.  However  no  poli- 
tical committee  can  deprive  any  voter  from  taking  part 
in  a  caucus  because  he  has  supported  an  independent 
candidate  for  office,  or  if  he  takes  an  oath,  when  so  re- 
quired in  a  caucus,  that  he  is  the  person  he  represents 
himself  to  be,  is  a  voter  in  the  ward,  a  member  of  the 
party  holding  the  caucus,  intends  to  support  the  nom- 
inees of  the  caucus  at  the  next  election,  and  has  not 
taken  part  in  any  caucus  of  any  other  party  within  a 
year.  The  state  central  committee  fixes  dates  for  cau- 
cuses relating  to  state  elecaons,  which  must  be  on  one  of 
two  specified  dates,  except  those  for  the  nomination  of 
representatives  to  the  general  court,  which  may  be  seven 
days  later,  as  the  city  or  towTi  committees  may  deter- 
mine. No  twj  parties  can  hold  their  caucuses  on  the 
same  day.  The  party  first  filing  with  the  secretary  of 
the  state  has  precedence  in  the  selection  of  caucus  days. 
Ballots  and  voting  places  are  furnished  at  the  expense 


In  Massachusetts.  105 

of  the  city  or  town.  Votin"r  lists  must  be  used  as  check 
lists.  Ballots  must  be  counted  in  full  view  of  the  voters. 
Plurality  elects. 

The  following  provisions  do  not  apply  to  Boston.  No- 
tices of  the  call  must  be  issued  seven  days  before  the 
caucus ;  must  state  the  place,  day,  and  hour  of  holding, 
which  shall  not  be  later  than  eight  o'clock  in  the  even- 
ing ;  be  posted  in  five  places  on  lines  of  public  travel,  in 
every  post-ofiice,  if  practicable,  and  published  in  one  or 
more  local  papers,  if  any  such  are  published;  specify 
how  the  caucus  shall  organize;  that  a  ballot  for  the 
choice  of  delegates,  candidates,  etc.,  shall  be  taken,  and 
the  polls  kept  open  for  at  least  thirty  minutes.  As  a 
precaution  against  fraudulent  counting,  the  "secretary 
of  the  caucus"  is  obliged,  upon  Avritten  request  of  ten 
qualified  voters,  to  keep  the  voting  lists  and  ballots,  and 
must  produce  them  if  called  for  by  any  court  of  justice. 

Under  the  act  applying  to  Boston  all  caucuses  relat- 
ing to  a  city  election  must  be  held  on  the  same  day,  ex- 
cept those  for  the  choice  of  a  ward  committee,  or  of  dele- 
gates to  a  convention  for  the  nomination  of  a  mayor  or 
of  aldennen.  No  two  parties  can  hold  caucuses  on  the 
same  day.  Eighteen  days'  notice  of  caucuses  must  be 
given,  and  seven  days  before  they  are  held  another 
notice  is  issued  stating  the  place,  day,  and  hour  of 
holding  them,  which  hour  (named  by  the  ward  com- 
mittee) cannot  be  earlier  than  two  nor  later  than  seven- 
thirty  in  the  afternoon.  The  polls  cannot  be  closed  be- 
fore eight-thirty.  Two  weeks  before  the  caucuses,  poll- 
ing places  must  be  prepared,  and  the  city  committee  no- 
tified of  the  places  selected.  Blank  nomination  papers 
are  prepared  at  the  expense  of  the  city.     No  nam^  can 


106  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

be  printed  upon  the  ballots  other  than  those  presented 
on  nomination  papers.  Under  the  amendment  of  1896 
the  number  of  signatures  required  upon  the  nomination 
papers  was  changed  from  five  to  ten  legal  voters  of  the 
ward  and  members  of  the  party.  Against  the  names  of 
delegates  to  a  convention  a  statement  may  be  added  that 
they  are  favorable  to,  support,  or  oppose  certain  persons 
or  measures,  all  to  be  embraced  in  not  exceeding  eight 
words.  These  nomination  papers  are  filed  with  the 
city  committee  not  less  than  ten  days  before  the  caucus, 
and  are  publicly  opened  and  announced.  The  papers 
are  then  examined  and  seven  days  before  the  caucus  are 
filed  with  the  election  commissioners,  thr^  days  being 
allowed  for  withdrawals,  filling  vacancies,  etc.,  for 
which  ample  provision  is  made  in  the  law.  Ballots,  both 
sample  and  official,  are  prepared  at  the  expense  of  the 
city.  In  form  and  arrangement  they  resemble  those 
provided  for  general  elections.  Caucus  officers  consist 
of  a  warden,  clerk,  and  five  inspectors.  They  are  elected 
annually  in  the  September  caucus  and  serve  in  all  cau- 
cuses held  in  their  respective  wards  for  one  year  from 
the  first  day  of  October  following.  Provision  is  made 
for  voting  in  additional  officers  at  the  caucus.  Candi- 
dates may  have  representatives  behind  the  guardrail  to 
supervise  the  check  list  and  witness  the  count  of  the 
ballots.  Caucus  officers,  regular  and  special,  are  sworn 
and  serve  without  pay.  The  general  proceedings,  man- 
ner of  voting,  etc.,  are  the  same  as  at  an  election.  The 
ballots  are  preserved,  and  recounts  may  be  called  for. 
The  provisions  of  this  act  may  be  adopted  by  any  other 
city  or  town  in  the  State  at  a  meeting  called  by  the  peti- 
tion of  fifty  voters  of  the  party  desiring  it.     After  a 


In  Massachusetts.  107 

year's  trial  the  act  may  again  be  revolved,  if  found  nn- 
satisfactory. 

The  law  is  silent  upon  the  matter  of  enrollment  or 
party  registration.  In  Boston,  an  entirely  new  regis- 
tration is  made  only  once  in  ten  years,  and  elsewhere  in 
the  State  there  is  no  provision  for  it  at  all.^  Enroll- 
ment under  party  niles  was  required  for  participation 
in  the  Kepublican  caucuses,  while  the  Democrats  had 
no  enrollment  whatever.  Grave  abuses  soon  developed, 
and  in  189Y  an  amendment  was  passed  providing  that 
if  a  challenged  person  made  oath  as  to  his  identity ;  that 
he  had  not  taken  part  in  the  caucuses  of  any  other  party 
for  a  year ;  and  that  he  intended  to  support  the  nominees 
of  the  caucus,  he  was  to  be  permitted  to  vote.  "The  re- 
sult has  been  anything  but  satisfactory.  Enrollment  by 
the  party  has  been  dropped  entirely  under  the  feeling 
that  if  a  man  is  not  enrolled,  he  will  be  permitted  to  vote 
nevertheless  by  taMng  the  prescribed  oath  at  the  caucus. 
To  certain  men  an  oath  offers  no  barrier."  ^  It  pre- 
vented the  unjust  exclusion  of  some,  but  permitted  the 
unfair  intrusion  of  others. 

The  immediate  result  of  the  original  law  was  good, 
although  it  applied  the  direct  vote  principle  only  to  the 
choice  of  ward  officers  and  delegates  to  conventions.  It 
met  with  such  favor  as  to  lead  to  the  extension  of  the 
direct  vote  plan,  as  already  indicated.^  The  Boston  act 
is,  however,  not  entirely  satisfactory.  The  perversion 
of  delegated  authority,  while  reduced,  has  not  been  out- 

>  Report  of  Conference  on  Primary  Election  Reform,  New  York,  1898,  p.  57. 

'  R.  L.  Gay  of  Massachusetts,  before  National  Conference  on  Primary  Elec- 
tions, New  York,  1898. 

*  R.  L.  Gay  of  Massachusetts,  before  National  Conference  on  Primary  Elec- 
tions, New  York,  1898. 


108  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

rooted,  because  of  the  retention  of  the  convention  sys- 
tem of  nomination  for  certain  offices.  The  right  to 
call  for  a  recount  of  ballots  has  led  to  much  abuse  of  the 
privilege,  mere  curiosity  prompting  too  many  to  ask  for 
it.  Through  the  carelessness  of  caucus  officers  in  check- 
ing names  in  the  caucus,  the  check  lists  are  often  unreli- 
able and  practically  useless  in  restraining  fraudulent 
voting  by  members  of  opposite  parties.  The  caucus  of- 
ficers seem  to  be  inclined  to  assume  large  powers  and 
exercise  them;  in  an  arbitrary  and  reprehensible  man- 
ner. A  partisan  or  factional  spirit  is  often  manifested, 
and  arrest  threatened  for  trivial  causes.  The  remedy, 
here,  would  seem  to  be  to  subject  the  officers  to  the  same 
control  and  penalties  as  general  election  officers.  The 
holding  of  the  caucuses  of  different  parties  on  different 
days  has  been  unsatisfactory.  Sentiment  is  rapidly 
coming  to  favor  concurrent  caucuses  for  all  parties,  held 
on  the  same  day  and  at  the  same  places.  With  these  op- 
portunities for  further  improvement,  primary  reform 
will  undoubtedly  be  carried  forward  rapidly  in  Massa- 
chusetts, and  judging  by  the  growing  favor  with  which 
the  method  of  nomination  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people 
is  being  received,  a  more  general  application  of  the  plan 
in  the  near  future  is  ver^'  probable. 

New  York. 

In  the  State  of  New  York  caucus  and  convention  re- 
form has  been  the  subject  of  considerable  legislation  of 
recent  date.  In  1898  a  law  was  passed  which  was  quite 
complete  and  detailed.^     Some  of  its  provisions,  how- 

>  Session  Laws  of  New  York,  1808,  p.  33L 


In  New  York.  109 

ever,  proved  unsatisfactory,  so  that  in  1899  a  new  law 
was  substituted.^  During  the  next  year  the  enrollment' 
plan,  which  had  been  incorporated  in  the  law  of  1899  in 
amendatory  form  from  the  law  of  1898,  was  amended 
for  a  second  time,^  and  now  stands  as  one  of  the  strong- 
est features  of  the  New  York  law,  and  as  the  best  en- 
rollment system  yet  devised  in  any  State.  Since  it 
would  be  but  confusing  to  enumerate  the  details  of  both 
the  laws  of  1898  and  1899,  and  since  the  former  is  no 
longer  in  force,  only  the  latter  will  be  explained,  with 
the  exception  of  its  enrollment  provisions,  which  will 
be  given  in  their  amended  form  as  stated  in  the  amend- 
ment of  1900. 

The  New  York  law  may  be  divided  into  four  parts, 
dealing  with  (1)  the  enrollment  of  voters;  (2)  primary 
elections  proper;  (3)  party  conventions;  (4)  the  selec- 
tion and  conduct  of  political  committees.  It  is  com- 
pulsory for  all  cities  and  villages  having  a  population  of 
5,000  or  more,  and  applies  to  all  parties  within  such 
cities  and  villages,  which  have  cast  at  least  three  per 
cent,  of  the  total  vote  polled  for  governor  at  the  last  elec- 
tion, unless  weaker  parties  elect  to  come  under  it  before 
July  1,  of  any  year  in  which  fall  primaries  are  held. 
Cities  and  villages  which  are  not  controlled  by  the  act, 
may  be  brought  under  its  operation  through  the  adop- 
tion of  a  resolution  by  the  general  party  committee  of 
the  county  of  each  party  "entitled  to  be  represented  by 
inspectors  of  election,"  requesting  that  the  question  be 
submitted  to  a  party  vote.  This  resolution  must  be  filed 
with  the  secretary  of  state  and  with  the  county  clerk, 

>  Session  Laws  of  New  York,  1899,  p.  968. 
'  Session  Laws  of  New  York,  1900,  p.  461. 


110  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

at  least  sixty  days  before  a  general  election.  If  no  reso- 
lution is  filed,  the  petition  of  one-tentk  of  the  voters  of 
the  city  or  village  asking  that  the  question  be  voted  upon 
may  be  filed  in  a  similar  manner.  A  majority  vote  is 
required  for  its  adoption.  If  later  it  is  desired  to  re- 
ject the  act,  a  similar  procedure  must  be  gone  through. 

The  adoption  of  the  law  docs  not  necessarily  mean 
that  candidates  are  to  be  nominated  by  direct  vote  in- 
stead of  by^  convention.  This  question  is  to  be  decided 
by  the  general  committee  of  a  party  by  majority  vote, 
through  the  adoption  of  a  rule  at  least  thirty  days  be- 
fore primary  day  that  the  nomination  of  that  party's 
candidates  for  specified  public  offices  shall  be  by  direct 
vote.  And  so  long  as  those  opposed  to  direct  primaries 
control  the  general  or  central  committee,  it  is  safe  to  pre- 
dict that  no  direct  primaries  will  be  permitted. 

The  exact  scope  of  the  law  is  somewhat  confusing, 
but  may  be  briefly  restated  as  follows :  It  is  compulsory 
in  certain  cities  and  villages  containing  at  least  5,000 
inhabitants  by  legislative  enactment,  and  in  others  by 
choice.  Wherever  compulsory,  it  is  controlling  in  the 
election  of  delegates,  alternates,  and  party  committee- 
men, and  for  the  nomination  of  officers.  Just  what  con- 
ventions shall  be  held  or  what  officers  shall  be  nominated 
by  direct  vote,  is  a  matter  left  with  the  choice  of  the 
general  committee  of  the  party  in  any  city  or  village 
governed  by  the  law.  If  delegates  are  to  be  elected, 
they  must  be  chosen  under  the  law,  with  the  exception 
of  those  who  axe  chosen  by  conventions  to  still  liigher 
conventions.  Finally,  it  only  applies  to  those  parties 
having  cast  at  least  three  per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  for 
governor  at  the  last  election,  although  smaller  parties 
may  elect  to  come  under  the  act. 


In  New  York.  Ill 

Some  very  important  powers  are  vested  in  tlie  general 
party  committees  by  the  law,  as,  for  example,  the  de- 
tennination  of  what  officers  shall  be  nominated  by  con- 
ventions. In  many  States  where  primary  election  laws 
have  eome  up  for  discussion,  "machine"  opposition  has 
aimed  to  get  some  such  provision  incorporated  in  the  law 
when  its  defeat  was  impossible,  because  by  controlling 
the  party  committees  it  could  practically  make  the  law 
inoperative  and  retain  the  old  convention  machinery. 
In  order  to  control  the  committees,  it  is  necessary  to 
retain  their  appointment  by  conventions  or  some  other 
authority  already  dominated  by  the  "macliine."  Hence, 
every  effort  of  primary  laws  to  popularize  party  organi- 
zation by  submitting  the  choice  of  party  officials  to  the 
voters  at  the  primary,  is  hotly  contested  by  the  politi- 
cians. 

The  New  York  law  provides  that  all  members  of  gen- 
eral committees,  and  assembly  district  and  ward  com- 
mittees, in  cities  of  the  first  class,  must  be  chosen  at 
primary  elections  on  the  annual  primary  day  in  the 
month  of  September  of  each  year.  In  other  cities  or 
villages  the  party  authority  may  determine  whether 
they  are  to  be  elected  at  the  primaries,  or  by  conven- 
tions, or  by  committees,  the  members  of  which  have 
been  elected  at  primaries.  The  members  of  committees 
may  take  office  as  provided  by  the  party  rules,  but  their 
entry  upon  duty  must  not  be  later  than  January  1  after 
their  election.  The  fixing  of  a  day  for  the  meeting  and 
organization  of  the  committees  is  also  left  to  party  reg- 
ulation instead  of  being  regulated  by  statute  as  in  case 
of  the  Oregon  law  of  1901.  This  law  is  decidedly  su- 
perior to  the  New  York  law  in  its  provisions  for  the 


112  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

maintenance  of  a  strong  popular  party  organization  and 
control,  and  is  deserving  of  careful  consideration  on  the 
part  of  primary  reformers  who  are  studying  this  phase 
of  the  question.  On  the  other  hand,  it  may  probably  be 
said,  that  the  New  York  law  is  superior  to  any  other 
which  continues  the  caucus  and  convention  system,  in  its 
provisions  to  maintain  the  independence:  and  integrity 
of  the  parties  at  the  primaries,  by  providing  for  a  thor- 
ough system  of  enrollment,  both  general  and  special, 
and  basing  the  right  to  vote  at  a  primary  absolutely  upon 
proper  enrollment  with  some  political  party.  Many 
commendations  and  favorable  criticisms  have  been  made 
throughout  the  country  respecting  this  provision,  and  it 
is  well  worth  close  consideration  in  these  pages. 

As  amended  by  the  act  of  1900,  the  enrollment  sys- 
tem is  as  follows:  Each  election  district  is  provided  with 
two  original  enrollment  books,  by  the  custodian  of  pri- 
mary records  some  time  before  the  fifteenth  of  Septem- 
ber, which  is  the  first  day  of  registration  in  each  year. 
The  books  have  fourteen  columns  on  each  page,  con- 
taining (1)  registration  number  of  elector,  (2)  sur- 
names arranged  alphabetically,  (3)  Christian  names, 
(4)  residence,  (5)  word  "yes,"  (6)  name  of  party,  if 
any,  (7)  special  enrollment,  (8)  record  of  transfer,  or 
removal,  (9)  word  "voted,"  (10)  record  of  challenges, 
(11  and  12)  similar  entries  as  (9  and  10),  in  case  the 
voter  attends  the  second  official  primary,  (13  and  14) 
similar  entries  for  third  primaries,  if  any.  The  enroll- 
ment books  arc  turned  over  to  the  election  inspectors, 
and  are  used  at  the  two  polling  booths  during  the  four 
regular  meetings  for  registration  in  each  year.  Ballot 
boxes,  one  for  each  election  district,  are  provided  to  re- 


In  New  York.  113 

colvo  the  enrollment  blanks,  whicli  are  filled  out  by  tbe 
electors  when  they  register.  These  enrollment  blanks 
are  arranged  as  follows: 

"Primary  enrollment  for  year ;  city  (or  village) 

of ;  county  of  ;  assembly  district  (or 

ward)  ; election  district. 

"I,  who  have  placed  a  mark  underneath  the  party 
emblem  hereunder  of  my  choice,  do  solemnly  declare 
that  I  have  this  day  registered  as  a  voter  for  the  next 
ensuing  election,  and  that  I  am  a  qualified  voter  of  the 
election  district  in  which  I  have  so  registered,  and  that 
my  residence  address  is  as  stated  by  me  at  the  time  I  so 
registered;  that  I  am  in  general  sympathy  with  the- 
principles  of  the  party  which  I  have  designated  by  my 
mark  hereunder;  that  it  is  my  intention  to  support  gen- 
erally at  the  next  general  election,  state  or  national,  the 
nominees  of  such  party  for  state  or  national  offices ;  and 
that  I  have  not  enrolled  with,  or  participated  in  any 
primary  election  or  convention  of  any  other  party  since 
the  first  day  of  last  year.  The  word  party  as  used  herein 
means  a  political  organization,  which  at  the  last  primaiy 
election  for  governor  polled  at  least  10,000  votes  for 
governor. 

"Make  a  cross  (x)  mark,  with  a  pencil  having  black 
lead,  in  the  circle  imder  the  emblem  of  the  party  with 
which  you  wish  to  enroll,  for  the  purpose  of  participat- 
ing in  its  primary  elections  during  the  next  year." 

After  having  received  the  enrollment  blank  and  en- 
velope, the  voter's  name  is  placed  in  the  enrollment 
books,  and  he  retires  into  the  voting  booth,  closes  the 
door,  marks  the  circle  beneath  the  party  of  his  choice, 
incloses  the  blank  in  the  envelope,  seals  it  and  deposits 


114:  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

it  in  the  ballot  box.  The  word  "Yes"  is  then  entered  in 
the  fifth  column  of  the  enrollment  books.  The  enroll- 
ment books  and  sealed  envelopes  remain  in  the  hands  of 
the  election  inspectors  until  the  close  of  the  last  day  of 
registration  when  they  are  delivered  to  the  custodian  of 
primary  records.  No  copies  of  the  same  may  be  made  at 
the  time,  and  absolute  secrecy  as  to  the  enrollment  must 
be  maintained.  The  ballot  box  containing  the  sealed  en- 
rollment blanks  remains  closed  "until  the  Tuesday  fol- 
lowing the  next  succeeding  day  of  general  election," 
when  it  is  opened  by  the  custodian  of  primary  records, 
the  envelopes  broken,  and  the  name  of  the  party  desig- 
nated by  each  elector  is  entered  in  the  proper  column  of 
the  enrollment  books.  This  completes  the  process  of  en- 
rollment and  qualifies  the  voter  for  participation  in  the 
primary.  If,  however,  he  declined  to  enroll,  or  if  he 
was  not  qualified,  or  changed  his  party  affiliations,  there 
still  remains  a  chance  to  participate  in  the  primary 
through  a  special  enrollment. 

The  provisions  of  the  law  of  1899  respecting  special 
enrollment  were  amended  in  1900,^  and  now  stand  as 
follows:  Any  elector  who  was  registered  during  one  of 
the  four  registration  meetings  in  the  last  year,  but  failed 
to  enroll,  may  become  separately  enrolled  at  any  time 
during  the  months  of  May  and  June,  and  in  any  presi- 
dential election  years  in  the  month  of  February  also, 

by  filing  a  declaration  in  the  following  form :  "I, , 

do  solemnly  declare,  that  I  reside  at ,  and  am  a 

qualified  voter  of  the election  district  of  the 

assembly  district  (or  ward)  in  the  city  (or  village)  of 
;  that  at  one  of  the  last  four  preceding  days  of  reg- 

>  Session  Laws  of  New  York,  1900,  ch.  204,  p.  432. 


In  New  York.  115 

istratlon,  T  registered  as  a  voter,  in  said  election  district, 
but  did  not  enroll,  and  I  request  that  I  be  specially  en- 
rolled Avith  the party ;  that  I  am  in  general  sym- 
pathy with  the  principles  of  the party ;  that  it  is  my 

intention  to  support  generally  at  the  next  general  elec- 
tion, state  or  national,  the  nominees  of  such  party  for 
state  or  national  offices,  and  that  I  have  not  enrolled 
with  or  participated  in  any  primary  election  or  con- 
vention of  any  otlier  party  since  the  first  day  of  last 
year.  The  word  "party"  as  used  herein  means  a  polit- 
ical organization  which  at  the  last  preceding  election 
of  a  governor  polled  at  least  ten  thousand  votes  for  gov- 
ernor." Upon  the  filing  of  such  a  declaration  the  elector 
is  qualified  to  participate  in  the  primaries  of  his  party. 
Electors  resident  in  territory  which  is  annexed  to 
some  city  or  village  to  which  the  law  is  applicable,  may 
become  specially  enrolled  in  a  similar  manner.  Any 
elector  who  came  of  age  after  the  last  general  election 
may,  at  any  time  prior  to  thirty  days  before  the  next  of- 
ficial primary  day,  become  specially  enrolled  by  filing  a 
declaration  similar  to  the  one  just  stated,  with  the  ap- 
propriate change  in  phrasing.  An  enrolled  voter  who 
moves  to  another  district  may  have  a  transfer  of  his 
enrollment  made  at  any  time  "between  the  first  day  of 
February  of  any  year,  and  the  thirtieth  day  before  the 
annual  primary  day,  except  during  the  thirty  days  be- 
fore the  official  primary  day  in  March  as  herein  pro- 
vided," Duplicates  of  the  original  enrollment  books  are 
made,  and  sent  to  the  various  party  committees,  but  the 
original  books  are  used  at  the  official  primary  elections. 
Except  for  the  period  during  which  the  law  requires  the 
enrollment  records  to  be  sealed,  they  are  open  to  the  in- 


116  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

spection  of  tlie  public,  and  in  case  of  cities  above- 
1,000,000  inhabitants,  transcripts  of  the  same  are  to 
be  published  between  December  15  and  January  1. 

Under  this  system  a  large  enrollment  is  secured,  be- 
cause every  voter  is  guaranteed  perfect  freedom  to  en- 
roll, and  dishonesty  and  injustice  on  the  part  of  the  elec- 
tion officers  acting  under  instructions  from  a  personal 
"machine,"  is  entirely  avoided.  The  voter,  instead  of 
being  compelled  to  make  a  special  journey  for  enroll- 
ment, which  is  frequently  inconvenient,  or  is  not  made 
because  of  ignorance  as  to  time  and  place,  can  enroll 
upon  the  day  he  registers,  thus  putting  the  question  be- 
fore him  at  a  time  when  it  is  most  likely  to  receive  seri- 
ous consideration.  The  publicity  of  the  rolls  of  the 
parties  is  secured  through  the  provision  that  they  are  to 
be  open  after  a  certain  specified  time  for  inspection,  and 
published  in  the  same  manner  as  are  the  registration 
lists. 

We  may  next  pass  to  that  part  of  the  law  which  deals 
directly  with  the  conduct  of  the  primaries.  Provision 
is  made  for  the  following  primary  days :  In  all  cities  and 
villages  of  the  second  class  covered  by  the  law,  there  are 
to  be  annual  primaries  held  on  the  seventh  Tuesday 
preceding  general  election  day ;  in  those  of  the  first  class, 
two  annual  primaries  are  to  be  held  on  the  seventh  and 
fifth  Tuesdays  before  election  day.  On  the  first  of  these 
days,  delegates  to  conventions  beyond  the  county  are 
chosen,  and  on  the  second,  all  other  delegates,  all  com- 
mitteemen, and  0.11  candidates  are  voted  for.  In  presi- 
dential years  another  official  primary  is  to  be  held  on  the 
last  Tuesday  of  March  for  the  election  of  delegates  to 
state  and  congressional  district  conventions.     The  ex- 


In  New  York.  117 

pense  of  liolding  tlicse  primaries  is  to  be  paid  in  tlie 
same  manner,  and  by  the  same  officials,  as  in  case  of 
general  elections,  and  is  thus  made  a  public  charge. 
The  custodian  of  primary  records,  who  is  a  very  im- 
portant officer  under  the  New  York  law,  determines  the 
primary  districts,  which  must  be  composed  of  at  least 
two  contiguous  election  districts  (the  highest  odd  num- 
ber, if  there  be  any,  comprising  one  of  itself).  Each 
primary  district  has  two  polling  places.  One  of  these 
is  occupied  by  the  strongest  party,  while  the  second  is 
used  by  all  other  parties. 

At  least  twenty  days  before  each  official  primary  the 
chairman  of  the  general  party  committee  must  send  a 
certified  statement  to  the  custodian  of  primary  records, 
of  the  kinds  and  number  of  delegates,  candidates,  or 
party  officials  who  are  to  be  chosen  at  the  primary.-  A 
notice  must  then  be  properly  published  between  the  tenth 
and  fifth  days  preceding  the  primary,  of  the  day,  place, 
and  hours  of  holding  the  same.  The  polls  must  be  open 
from  two  to  nine  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  In  case  of 
primaries  not  held  subject  to  this  act  ("unofficial  pri- 
maries") similar  notice  must  be  given  by  the  proper 
party  officers,  at  the  expense  of  the  party.  All  unofficial 
primaries  are  held  at  the  expense  of  the  parties.  Since 
there  are  two  different  polling  places  within  each  pri- 
mary district,  two  boards  of  primary  election  inspectors 
are  necessary.  The  general  election  inspectors  of  the 
districts  comprising  the  primary,  who  represent  the 
party  which  at  the  last  preceding  election  cast  the  larg- 
est vote,  shall  act  at  the  primary  polling  place  of  that 
party;  while  similar  inspectors,  who  represent  the  sec- 
ond strongest  party,  are  to  act  at  the  primary  polling 


118  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

booths  of  all  other  parties.  They  serve  under  oath,  and 
receive  five  dollars  per  day  as  compensation.  Separate 
ballot  boxes  and  ballots  are  provided  for  each  party. 
Sample  ballots  are  to  be  exhibited,  and  all  official  ballots 
must  be  readily  distinguishable  in  color. 

Due  enrollment,  which  as  appears  in  the  explanation 
of  the  enrollment  plan  means  party  registration,  is  the 
qualification  for  participation  in  the  primary.  An  en- 
rolled voter  must,  upon  challenge,  answer  questions  un- 
der oath  as  to  his  name  and  residence.  Upon  receipt  of 
"one  of  each  of  the  ballots  intended  for  the  electors  of  the 
election  district  in  which  he  resides  which  are  in  the 
polling  place,"  the  voter  marks  his  ballot  and  delivers  it 
to  the  inspector,  who  deposits  it  in  the  proper  ballot  box. 
The  voter  then  delivers,  in  folded  form,  all  of  the  un- 
voted ballots  given  to  him,  and  these  are  deposited  in 
a  box  for  unvoted  ballots  and  later  destroyed  without 
being  unfolded.  After  the  elector  has  cast  his  ballot, 
the  term  "voted"  is  entered  opposite  his  name  in  the 
proper  column  of  the  enrollment  books. 

In  the  method  of  printing,  handling,  voting,  and  can- 
vassing ballots,  the  general  election  laws  govern  as  far 
as  not  inconsistent  with  this  act.  Watchers,  to  the  ex- 
tent of  one  for  each  district,  may  be  appointed  by  every 
political  committee,  and  b;^  every  two  or  more  persons 
whose  names  appear  upon  the  ticket.  "A  reasonable 
number  of  challengers,  at  least  one  for  any  three  or 
more  persons  of  each  party,"  whose  names  appear  upon 
the  ticket,  are  allowed  to  remain  "outside  the  guard- 
rail of  each  polling  place." 

That  part  of  the  law  governing  the  canvass  of  the 
voters  is  very  complete,  and  worthy  of  closer  study  than 


In  New  Jersey.  119 

space  permits.  It  provides  for  a  count  in  a  "clearly- 
lighted,  open  room"  in  plain  view  of  the  public.  To  de- 
feat the  purpose  of  ballot  box  stuffers,  it  is  provided 
that  when  the  number  of  ballots  contained  in  a  box  is 
found  to  be  greater  than  the  number  that  ought  to  be 
contained  therein,  as  shown  by  the  enrollment  books, 
one  of  the  inspectors  publicly,  and  with  his  back  to  the 
box,  draws  out  as  many  ballots  as  were  in  excess.  These 
ballots  are  destroyed  without  revealing  their  contents. 
The  returns  must  be  completed  by  the  custodian  of  pri- 
mary elections  with  whom  the  election  inspectors  file 
their  statements  of  canvass  within  three  days  after  the 
primary,  and  proper  certificates  of  election  must  be 
transmitted  to  the  successful  candidates,  delegates,  or 
committeemen.  Provision  is  also  made  for  the  proper 
apportionment  of  delegates,  and  for  the  organization 
and  procedure  of  conventions  which  may  be  held  under 
the  law. 

New  Jeeset. 

The  New  Jersey  statute  books  contain  three  laws  per- 
taining to  primaries,  passed  in  1878,  1883,  and  1884. 
Only  one  of  these,  the  act  of  1884,  contemplates  direct 
primaries.^  It  is  very  rudimentary  in  form,  and  merely 
permits  but  does  not  require  the  holding  of  direct  pri- 
maries, their  conduct,  if  held,  being  left  to  the  political 
parties.  It  brings  the  primary  election  ofiicers  within 
the  pale  of  law  by  requiring  an  oath  that  they  will  faith- 
fully perform  their  duties  in  accordance  with  the  law 
of  the  State,  and  with  the  rules  of  the  party. 

>  Session  Laws  of  New  Jersey,  1884,  p.  333. 


120  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

Di:la"Waee. 

In  18S7  ^  and  1897  ^  primary  election  laws  were 
passed  in  Delaware  applying  to  New  Castle  county. 
These  laws  are  sometimes  erroneously  quoted  as  estab- 
lishing direct  primaries  when  none  but  "primary  as- 
semblages of  voters"  are  contemplated  by  both  of  the 
acts.  The  act  of  1897,  which  superseded  that  of  1887, 
is  very  fully  worked  out  and  seems  to  rank  among  the 
most  comprehensive  and  complete  of  the  so-called  "cau- 
cus laws"  which  have  yet  been  enacted. 

Makyland. 

In  Maryland  nominations  by  direct  vote  have  been 
made  in  a  nimiber  of  counties  for  some  time,  but  no  law 
for  their  control  has  as  yet  been  enacted,  all  bills  which 
were  introduced  having  been  defeated.  As  in  all  the 
neighboring  States,  there  has,  however,  been  consider- 
able agitation  in  Maryland  in  favor  of  direct  primary 
legislation  during  the  last  few  years,  but  "machine" 
opposition  has  in  this  State,  as  elsewhere,  successfully 
resisted  all  reform.^ 


'  Session  Laws  of  Delaware,  1887,  p.  59. 

'  Session  Laws  of  Delawares  1897,  p.  375. 

3  One  of  the  proposed  laws  was  read  lor  the  first  time  in  the  Senate  on  March 
7,  1901.  It  was  optional  and  comprehensive,  including  nominations  for  state, 
county,  and  municipal  offices.  The  state  central  committee,  under  whose  direc- 
tion the  entire  conduct  of  the  primary  was  placed,  was  "  to  adopt  rules  and 
regulations  as  to  whether  candidates  shall  be  selected  by  direct  vote,  or  shall  be 
nominated  by  conventions."  The  general  election  laws  were  to  apply  with  re- 
spect to  the  marking,  folding,  casting  and  counting  of  ballots,  etc.  The  open 
primary  system  of  voting  was  to  be  used,  only  general  registration  and  qualifi- 
cation to  vote  being  required  for  participation  in  the  primary  election.  No  pe- 
tition but  only  fees  were  required  for  the  presentation  of  the  names  of  candi- 
dates. The  party  was  to  cover  the  expense  of  ballots  and  notices,  while  all 
other  bills  were  met  out  of  the  public  treasury. 


CHAPTEE  III. 

AN     INTRODUCTION     TO     THE     GENERAL.     FEATURES 
AND  RESULTS  OF  SOUTHERN  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

Direct  primaries  are  common  throughout  the  South. 
In  everv  State,  systems  of  one  kind  or  another  are  in 
operation.  They  possess  no  uniformity,  and  have  not 
been  created  in  detail  through  statutory  enactment,  but 
vary  from  county  to  county  in  each  State,  according  to 
the  rules  of  the  political  party  through  which  they  are 
established.  They  have  in  common  but  little  more 
than  the  general  principle  of  the  direct  primary  upon 
which  they  are  based,  and  the  freedom  from  legislative 
control  under  which  they  operate.  It  is  almost  gener- 
ally true  that  direct  primaries  existed  in  the  South  long 
before  they  were  legalized  by  statute.  The  Democratic 
party  seems  to  have  found  this  means  of  nomination 
convenient  and  successful,  even  though  there  was  noth- 
ing but  the  bond  of  honor  to  support  the  results  of  the 
primary  election.  When  the  southern  legislatures 
finally  stepped  in  to  recognize  the  direct  vote  system,  and 
this  was  at  widely  different  times  in  the  various  States, 
they  did  little  more  than  legalize  their  action,  leaving 
the  use  of  the  system  in  all  cases  optional  with  the  politi- 
cal parties.  There  is  at  present  no  movement  towards  a 
compulsory  state  law. 

As  a  result  of  the  existence  of  optional  primaries, 
some  of  the  difficulties  of  illegal  and  fraudulent  voting, 
which  arise  at  the  common  primaries  of  all  parties,  are 
avoided,  since  each  party  may  by  itself  decide  whether 


122  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

it  shall  liold  direct  primaries  at  all,  and  if  so,  determine 
the  time,  place,  and  manner  of  holding  the  same,  as  well 
as  the  qualifications  of  those  who  may  participate.  To 
prevent  conflicts,  the  question  of  precedence  in  the  choice 
of  a  date,  is,  in  some  cases,  detemined  by  priority  of  no- 
tice of  a  primary  given  to  the  proper  officer.  Since  the 
expense  is  borne  by  the  party  through  the  assessment  of 
its  candidates,  and  not  by  the  State,  the  argument  that 
concurrent  primaries  would  be  more  economical,  and  a 
smaller  burden  to  the  taxpayer,  has  no  application  here. 
Should  the  southern  systems,  however,  be  made  compul- 
sory, and  a  public  expense,  it  would  be  highly  desirable 
on  grounds  of  economy,  and  for  other  reasons  as  well,  to 
hold  the  primaries  of  all  parties  on  the  same  day  and 
at  the  same  places. 

Another  result  of  the  optional  character  of  southern 
primaries  is  that  they  are  almost  exclusively  employed 
by  the  dominant  party.  While  the  Republican  party 
generally  has  a  ticket  in  the  field  in  county  nominations, 
it  frequently  happens  that  there  is  none  in  case  of  state 
campaigTis,  The  expense  of  Republican  campaigns  is 
always  incurred  in  a  hopeless  cause,  and  it  will  be 
readily  seen  that  the  tendency  would  be  towards  its  re- 
duction to  a  minimum.  Should  direct  primaries  be 
adopted,  they  ought  in  the  South,  as  elsewhere,  to  be  at 
public  expense,  otherwise  the  cost  to  the  candidates 
would  be  so  heavy,  their  number  being  so  small,  that  it 
would  be  practically  impossible  to  get  men  of  even 
fairly  good  standing  and  popularity,  to  stand  as  candi- 
dates merely  for  the  sake  of  keeping  up  the  party  organi- 
zation. 

As  a  result  of  the  ascendency  of  the  Democratic  party 


Southern  Systems  in  General.  123 

in  the  South,  its  primaries  have  acquired  an  extraordi- 
nary importance.  A  nomination  at  a  Democratic  pri- 
mary is  equivalent  to  an  election.  Hence,  the  struggle 
occurs  at  the  nomination.  The  voter's  interest  centers 
at  the  primary.  If  once  his  man  is  carried  safely  there, 
all  is  well,  for  the  election  is  but  a  formal  confirmation 
of  the  results  of  the  primary.  His  presence  at  the  gen- 
eral election  does  not  appeal  to  him  as  being  as  import- 
ant and  as  necessary  as  at  the  primary,  and  so  it  often 
happens  that  a  larger  vote  is  polled  at  the  primary  than 
at  the  ensuing  election. 

The  argument  that  there  is  a  tendency  for  the  direct 
primary  to  assume  the  character  of  a  general  election, 
to  the  prejudice  of  the  latter,  is  sometimes  falsely  ad- 
vanced against  direct  primaries  by  opponents  in  the 
North,  who,  having  heard  of  the  southern  experience, 
neglect  to  inquire  into  the  causes  lying  back  of  it. 
Where  parties  are  fairly  well-balanced,  and  there  is 
even  the  slightest  probability  of  success,  it  is  quite  in- 
conceivable that  any  party  would  allow  its  victory  at  the 
primary  to  be  compromised  by  default  at  the  general 
election.  Besides,  under  a  general  law  requiring  state, 
congressional,  legislative,  and  county  candidates  to  be 
nominated  by  direct  primary,  even  though  one  party 
might  be  in  a  hopeless  minority  in  the  State,  it  might 
be  in  a  majority  in  many  counties  in  one  section,  and  in 
congressional,  senatorial,  or  assembly  districts  in  vari- 
ous other  sections,  in  all  of  which  there  would  be  the  in- 
centive for  a  full  vote. 

The  object  in  using  the  direct  vote  system  in  the 
South,  differs  to  some  extent  from  that  in  the  ISTorth 
and  "West,  where  it  is  hoped  primarily  to  secure  free- 


12i  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

dom  from  "machine"  and  "boss"  rule  in  politics.  The 
Democratic  party  declares  that  its  main  purpose  is  the 
elimination  of  the  negro  vote,  while  at  the  same  time  it 
also  defeats  the  "machine."  This  exclusion  of  the  negro 
vote  is  accomplished  by  means  of  the  power  delegated  by 
■statute  to  the  party  authority,  to  fix  the  qualifications  for 
participation  in  the  primary  election.  Great  unfairness 
to  the  legal  negro  voter  is  thus  made  possible.  For  ex- 
ample, in  one  instance,  the  party  rules  require  that 
"every  negro  applying  for  membership  in  a  Demo- 
cratic club,  or  offering  to  vote  in  a  Democratic  primary 
election,  must  produce  a  written  statement  of  ten  rep- 
utable white  men  who  shall  swear  that  they  know  of 
their  own  knowledge  that  the  applicant  or  voter  cast 
his  ballot  for  General  Hampton  in  1876,  and  has  voted 
the  Democratic  ticket  continuously  since."  ^  The  diffi- 
culties which  a  provision  like  this  creates  when  enforced 
by  hostile  authorities  are  insuperable,  and  present  ready 
opportunities  for  an  unfair  exclusion  of  the  colored 
vote. 

The  southern  primary  election  laws  are  very  rudi- 
mentary and  imperfect.  They  contain  few  positive  reg- 
ulations, and  delegate  extraordinary  powers  to  the  party 
authorities  by  authorizing  them  to  prescribe  all  other 
regulations  that  may  be  necessary  for  tlie  proper  con- 
duct of  primary  elections.  The  few  provisions  em- 
braced in  the  laws  provide  mainly  for  the  proper  publi- 
cation of  the  call  for  the  holding  of  primaries ;  the  re- 
quirement of  an  oath  from  primary  election  officers  in 
order  to  secure  their  responsibility  to  the  party  and  to 
the  State;  and  the  punishment  of  certain  corrupt  prac- 

>  Eule  2  of  Rules  of  Democratic  party  of  South  Carolina,  adopted  June  7,  1894. 


tSouthern  Systems  in  General.  125 

tices.  The  great  leeway  tlms  allowed  to  political  par- 
ties in  the  conduct  of  primary  elections,  is  one  of  the 
main  defects  in  the  southern  laws,  and  is  responsible  for 
most  of  the  objectionable  results  of  southern  experiences 
Avith  direct  primaries.  The  party  committee  is  raised 
to  a  level  of  unlimited  power,  and  when  it  is  appointive, 
the  chances  for  an  abuse  of  its  authoritative  position  are 
practically  certain.  This  defect  is  partly  overcome  in 
some  laws  through  a  provision  that  the  party  committee 
shall  be  elected  at  the  primary.  However,  even  the 
popular  selection  of  the  committee  cannot  sufficiently  re- 
strain action  where  such  extraordinary  powers  are 
lodged. 

The  defrayal  of  the  expense  of  direct  primaries  is 
left  to  the  parties,  under  the  southern  laws.  This,  as 
has  already  been  suggested,  prevents  the  Kepublican 
party,  which  under  existing  conditions  is  in  a  hopeless 
minority,  from  giving  the  system  a  trial.  The  common 
means  of  raising  money  within  the  party  are  by  sub- 
scription, by  voluntary  contribution,  and  by  assess- 
ment of  candidates.  The  latter  is  the  most  common 
method  and  furnishes  the  main  source  of  revenue  to  the 
party.  This  is  why  the  southern  systems  are  so  ex- 
tremely unpopular  with  the  candidates  and  indeed  with 
most  politicians.  In  some  States  where  majority  nomi- 
nations are  required,  the  burden  of  two  primaries  falls 
upon  them,  aside  from  that  of  an  expensive  personal 
campaign,  and  inflicts  serious  inroads  upon  their  bank 
accounts.^ 

Under  these  conditions  it  is  not  strange  that  there 
should  be  found  those  who  are  ready  to  denounce  the 

1  South  Carolina,  Nebraska,  and  Mississippi  require  majority  nominations. 


126  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

southern  system  of  direct  primaries.  One  ^vriter  de- 
scribes it  as  "tyrannical  and  oppressive  on  the  minority 
with  a  tendency  to  build  up  a  'machine'  within  the  party, 
and  to  perpetuate  the  party  and  its  'machine'  in  power."^ 
Similar  opinions  were  expressed  by  men  in  other 
States.^  This  argument,  based  upon  southern  exper- 
ience, is  often  advanced  by  northern  opponents  of 
the  direct  primary.  It  has  no  force  whatever,  in  con- 
sideration of  the  peculiar  political  conditions  of  the 
South,  and  the  defective  and  rudimentary  laws  under 
which  the  southern  systems  are  compelled  to  operate. 
The  party  which  is  said  to  be  perpetuated  in  power  is 
the  Democratic  party.  It  is  a  well-known  fact,  how- 
ever, that  this  party  maintains  its  ascendency,  not  by 
virtue  of  this  or  that  nominating  system,  but  because  of 
larger  numbers  and  greater  voting  strength.  The  Demo- 
cratic party  of  the  South  has  been,  and  is,  in  control ;  not 
only  where  direct  primaries  are  used,  but  also  where 
nominatons  are  made  under  the  caucus  and  convention 
system. 

That  a  "machine"  should  exist  within  the  party  is 
also  but  natural.  There  are  no  legal  safeguards  around 
the  primary.  Party  organization  and  party  action  are 
absolutely  controlled  by  a  few  so-called  party  leaders, 
who  arbitrarily  issue  their  rules  and  orders  which  are 
given  the  force  of  law.  "What  else  but  "machine"  in- 
fluence can  be  expected  where  such  irresponsible,  auto- 
cratic powers  are  calmly  delegated  to  a  narrow  group 
of  party  committeemen,  acting  under  cover  of  statute  ? 

The  southern  systems  are  also  very  imperfect  in  that 

>  Senator  Butler  in  Milwaukee  Sentinel,  Feb.  27,  1901.  » 

'  Senator  Sullivan  of  Mississippi,  and  Representative  Lindsay  of  North  Caro- 
lina, in  Milwaukee  Sentinel,  Feb.  27,  1901. 


Southern  Systems  in  General.  127 

they  make  no  provision  for  the  formulation  of  a  plat- 
form. No  means  is  provided  for  the  expression  of  gen- 
eral principles  of  party  policy.  No  definite  body  is 
designated  for  the  formal  announcement  of  the  aims 
and  the  ideas  of  national,  state,  or  local  administration, 
which  the  party  members  may  entertain.  No  oppor- 
tunity is  afforded  whereby  the  party  may  publicly 
pledge  itself  to  such  ideas,  such  policies,  and  such  prin- 
ciples of  government.  The  individual  voter  is  at  a  loss 
to  decide  which  party  he  should  support  in  order  to 
maintain  his  opinions  on  public  matters.  Real  party 
responsibility  there  cannot  be  in  such  cases,  because  no 
way  is  provided  in  which  the  party  may  publicly  as- 
sume responsibilities.  Since  the  voter  objects  to  cast- 
ing his  ballot  in  the  dark,  but  demands  some  assur- 
ance as  to  what  general  course  a  candidate  would  pursue 
if  placed  in  office,  the  inevitable  result  of  the  absence  of 
party  responsibility  is  the  substitution  of  individual  re- 
sponsibility. If  the  party  as  a  body  cannot  pledge  it- 
self to  specific  governmental  policies,  then  each  individ- 
ual candidate  must  do  so,  otherwise  the  ballot  would 
have  no  significance.  And  so  it  has  happened  that  in- 
dividual platforms  are  frequently  necessary  in  the 
South.  In  some  cases  there  are  as  many  platforms  as 
there  are  candidates.^ 

Another  disintegi*ating  tendency  resulting  from  the 
failure  to  regulate  the  southern  direct  primaries  by  stat- 
ute is  that  of  personal  politics.  This  flows  from  the  ex- 
tra-legal position  of  the  systems ;  from  the  extreme  im- 
portance given  to  the  position  of  each  candidate  by  vir- 
tue of  individual  platforms ;  and  from  the  temperament 

»  Outlook,  Vol.  60,  p.  1-lG. 


128  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

of  the  SoTitliemer.  The  man  who  runs  for  office  does 
not  stand  upon  principles  laid  down  by  his  party,  but 
must  rely  upon  his  o-sati  supports,  and  it  is  to  the  inter- 
est of  his  opponents  to  make  them  appear  as  weak  and 
as  few  as  possible.  His  personal  pledges,  upon  the 
merits  of  which  he  must  rely  for  success,  may  be  wil- 
fully misinterpreted,  his  actions  may  be  misrepresented, 
and  his  statements  discredited  as  insincere.  This  is 
largely  impossible  where  the  party  itself  comes  forward 
with  formally  adopted  and  solemn  declarations  of  prin- 
ciple and  policy  which  sen^e  as  a  general  platfoiTu  for 
all  of  its  candidates.  It  is  the  individual  candidate  who 
can  with  propriety  be  called  to  account  for  his  platform 
in  the  South,  and  where  ambition,  coupled  with  personal 
animosity,  inspires  criticisms,  it  will  be  seen  that  this 
privilege  may  easily  be  abused.  It  is  the  personal  cam- 
paign, fought  out  on  an  individual  platform,  for  nomi- 
nation under  an  extra-legal  system,  that  begets  vicious 
personal  politics.  Substitute  a  sound  party  platform, 
and  a  statutory  direct  vote  system,  and  the  incentive  and 
opportunity  for  personal  politics  will  be  practically  re- 
moved. 

That  the  effect  upon  government  of  these  bitter  at- 
tacks and  counter  attacks  engaged  in  by  the  aspirants  to 
public  office  cannot  be  wholesome,  is  to  be  expected.  The 
wound  of  the  slanderous  tongue  is  difficult  to  heal.  Not 
only  do  the  candidates  lower  themselves  in  the  estima- 
tion of  the  public,  and  inflict  upon  each  other  the  very 
serious  loss  of  a  necessary  and  healthful  respect  on  the 
part  of  the  people,  but  they  carry  the  spirit  of  hostility 
into  the  government  itself,  and  thereby  tend  to  defeat 
the  ends  of  an  efficient  administration.    This  atmosphere 


Southern  Systems  in  General.  129 

of  discord,  which  frequently  envelopes  southern  politics, 
tends  to  keep  the  best  men  out  of  office,  and  gives  those 
who  have  once  entrenched  themselves  in  public  places  a 
decided  advantage  over  their  opponents. 

It  is  true  of  the  South  that  the  direct  vote  svstem  is 
more  popular  in  the  country  than  in  the  city.  The  ex- 
planation lies  in  the  fact  that  in  the  rural  districts  tho 
people  enjoy  all  the  advantages  of  the  system  without 
its  disadvantages.  Personal  politics  is  most  common  and 
most  effective,  and  at  the  same  time  leaves  its  most  un- 
fortimate  results,  where  the  population  is  concentrated.. 
Ignorance  as  to  the  merits  of  candidates  and  as  to  the 
principles  and  policies  of  administration  for  which  they 
individually  stand,  is  more  common  in  the  city  than  in 
the  country.  In  a  sparse  population  where  mutual  ac- 
quaintances are  many  and  offices  few,  good  feeling  is 
more  apt  to  prevail,  than  where  every  man  feels  him- 
seK  but  an  atom  of  the  great  mass  of  an  urban  popula- 
tion. In  rural  communities  the  spirit  of  good-fello^^•- 
ship  is  usually  stronger  than  is  the  thirst  for  power,  and 
prevents  the  many  evils  which  lurk  in  extra-legal  institu- 
tions from  manifesting  themselves.  For  these  and  other 
reasons  the  southern  farmer  is  more  enthusiastic  over  the 
direct  vote  system  than  is  his  neighbor  from  the  town. 

What  has  been  said  respecting  direct  primaries  in  the 
South  must  not  be  construed  as  a  severe  arraignment  of 
their  merits.  It  has,  perhaps,  been  made  sufficiently 
clear  that  the  objectionable  experiences  which  are  en- 
countered there  cannot  be  fairly  advanced  as  arguments 
against  the  practicability  of  the  general  principle  of  the 
direct  primary,  but  that  these  find  their  cause  in  the  im- 
perfection of  the  primary  legislation ;  in  the  extra-legal 


130  Direct  Primary  Legidation. 

nature  of  the  systems ;  in  the  peculiar  political  conditions 
under  which  they  operate ;  and  in  the  character  and  tem- 
perament of  the  people.  To  give  the  principle  of  a  di- 
rect vote  a  fair  trial  in  the  South,  it  would  be  necessary 
to  inaugurate  a  comprehensive  and  complete  system  of 
public  primaries,  regulated  in  all  their  detail  by  statute, 
secured  by  the  safeguards  of  the  Austi'alian  ballot  sys- 
tem, subjected  in  all  their  aspects  to  the  control  of  the 
State,  with  proper  provisions  for  the  presentation  of 
candidates  to  tlie  public;  for  the  maintenance  of  a  rep- 
resentative party  organization  through  the  submission 
of  the  choice  of  party  committeemen  to  the  voters  at 
the  primary ;  and  for  the  promulgation  of  a  party  plat- 
form by  a  legally  determined  body  which  is  directly 
representative  of  the  individual  members  of  the  party. 

Such  a  law  would  afford  a  firm  and  broad  foundation 
for  systematic  and  responsible  party  action,  and  would 
imdoubtedly  yield  better  results  than  are  attained  under 
the  present  systems.  The  direct  primaries  have  prob- 
ably come  to  stay  in  the  South  in  spite  of  the  difficulties 
with  which  they  are  involved.  Rather  than  return  to 
the  caucus  and  convention  system  the  people  of  the 
South,  as  elsewhere,  hold  fast  even  to  their  imperfect 
direct  primary  systems.  But  we  may  hope,  and  with 
some  reason  expect,  that  the  success  of  the  more  thor- 
oughly legalized  systems  in  thfe  North  will  lead  to  a 
movement  in  the  direction  of  more  complete  laws,  giv- 
ing the  southern  systems  a  safer  legal  setting,  and  de- 
priving the  leading  party  spirits  of  thoee  irresponsible 
and  autocratic  powers  which  to-day  are  the  greatest 
menace  to  political  liberty  in  the  South. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

SOUTHERN  DIRECT  PRIMARY  LEGISLATION. 
South  Carolina. 

The  first  legislation  in  South  Carolina  concerning  di- 
rect primaries  was  enacted  in  1888.  The  direct  vote 
system  had,  however,  been  in  operation  in  this  State  for 
some  time  before  its  passage.  The  law  was  compulsory 
in  the  sense  that  whenever  any  political  party  held  an 
election  for  the  purpose  of  choosing  candidates,  or  for 
the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions,  such  an  elec- 
tion was  to  be  conducted  subject  to  the  act,  but  the  polit- 
ical parties  were  not  compelled — nor  are  they  at  the 
present  time — to  nominate  any  of  their  officers  at  direct 
primaries. 

As  in  the  case  of  most  of  the  southern  laws  of  to-day, 
great  power  was  given  to  the  political  parties  by  allow- 
ing them  to  prescribe  all  rules  and  regulations  for  the 
conduct  of  the  primary  outside  of  the  few  unimportant 
provisions  laid  dowTi  by  law.  The  manager  of  the  pri- 
mary election,  whose  general  duties  were  outlined  by  the 
act,  was  required,  before  receiving  any  ballot,  to  admin- 
ister to  the  voter  an  oath  that  he  was  duly  qualified  to 
vote  according  to  the  rules  of  the  party,  and  that  he  had 
not  participated  in  any  other  primary.  This  law  was 
extremely  rudimentary  and  imperfect,  but  was  a  stop  in 
the  right  direction,  in  that  it  to  some  extent  curbed  the 
irresponsible  powers  of  the  party  authorities,  and  par- 
tially  secured   the  individual   members   of   the   party 


132  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

against    the    arbitraiy  rules    and    practices    of    party 
"bosses," 

The  act  as  passed  in  1888  *  is  still  in  force  largely  in 
its  original  fonn,  although  several  minor  amendments 
have  since  been  made.  The  provision  that  primary  elec- 
tion "managers"  were  to  take  an  oath  faithfully  to  per- 
form their  duties,  in  failure  of  which  fines  were  to  be 
imposed,  greatly  strengthened  the  position  of  the  party 
authorities  who  prescribed  the  rules,  for  however  bad  the 
rules  might  be  there  was  no  escape  from  their  execution. 
Protests  on  part  of  honest  primary  "managers,"  where 
the  politicians  had  failed  in  placing  their  own  subordi- 
nates, were  of  no  avail. 

Considerable  abuse  seems  to  have  developed,  es- 
pecially in  the  large  cities,  because  of  the  appointment 
of  the  primary  election  officers  by  the  party  authority. 
As  a  result,  the  act  of  1888  was  amended  in  1896,^  so 
as  to  allow  candidates  in  cities  of  40,000  inhabitants  or 
more,  to  appoint  watchers  at  all  the  polling  places  to  see 
to  their  interests.  It  was  also  found  that  a  considerable 
number  of  tmqualified  persons  participated  in  the  elec- 
tions. To  remedy  this,  the  act  of  1896  contained  a  pro- 
vision that  henceforth  only  previously  registered  voters 
were  to  be  allowed  to  vote,  though  party  registration  was 
not  required.  In  1900  an  act  was  passed  ^  which  al- 
lowed candidates  in  cities  of  20,000  instead  of  40,000 
or  more  inhabitants  to  appoint  watchers,  and  required 
party  registration  of  voters  under  regulations  to  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  rules  of  the  party  in  place  of  general  reg- 

>  Session  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  1888,  p.  10, 

•  Session  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  1896,  p.  56. 

•  Session  Laws  of  South  Carolina,  1900,  p.  375. 


In  South  Carolina.  133 

istration  under  the  law  of  1896.  Such  party  registra- 
tion waSj  however,  to  be  compulsory  only  in  cities  of 
20,000  population  and  over. 

Upon  this  limited  legal  basis  of  the  primary,  there  has 
risen  in  South  Carolina  a  very  elaborate  system,  filled 
out  in  all  its  details,  both  important  and  unimportant,  by 
rules  prescribed  by  the  party  authority.  As  a  primary 
system  it  is  perhaps  the  most  complete  of  all  those  found 
in  the  South.  Its  operation  is,  however,  here,  as  well  as 
in  the  other  southern  States,  confined  in  practice  to  the 
Democratic  party.  No  candidates  for  state  or  county 
offices,  except  in  one  or  two  counties,  for  county  offices, 
have  been  nominated  or  suggested  by  the  Republican 
party,  and  there  is  invariably  only  one  ticket  proposed  in 
the  state  election.  It  is  claimed  that  the  vote  is  gener- 
ally very  light,  and  that  little  interest  is  taken  in  the  var- 
ious candidates.^  Nevertheless  it  has  been  adhered  to 
very  tenaciously  by  the  members  of  the  only  party  which 
has  given  it  a  trial. 

The  method  of  conducting  the  primary  is,  in  brief, 
as  follows:  The  candidates  for  state  and  congressional 
honors  file  with  the  state  central  committee  of  the  party 
a  statement  that  they  are  candidates  for  certain  offices, 
with  a  pledge  that  they  will  abide  by  the  results  of  the 
primary.  Thereupon  the  state  committee  arranges  a 
series  of  campaign  meetings  to  be  held  at  the  several 
county  seats,  and  the  candidates  go  upon  the  circuit,  and 
at  these  meetings  set  forth  their  claims  and  qualifica- 
tions, and,  if  so  disposed,  attack  the  records  and  merits 
of  their  opponents.  For  county  and  legislative  positions, 
candidates  file  similar  statements  with  the  county  com- 

*  Hon.  R.  Cooi)er  of  South  Carolina,  in  Milwaukee  Sentinel,  Feb.  27,  1901. 


134  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

mittee.  This  body  also  arranges  a  series  of  meetings 
throughout  the  county.  Almost  invariably  candidates 
publish  cards  in  the  public  print  announcing  their  can- 
didacy. At  the  primary  elections  which  follow,  all  of- 
ficers, appointive  as  well  as  elective,  are  voted  upon  by 
the  electors,  and  the  wishes  thus  expressed  respecting 
the  appointive  positions  are  respected  by  the  governor 
and  the  legislature  in  placing  appointments.^  Tickets 
for  the  state  offices  are  printed  with  blank  spaces  under 
the  titles  of  the  offices  to  be  voted  for,  where  the  voter 
may  write  the  name  he  prefers.  The  expense  of  holding 
the  primary  election  is  defrayed  by  making  assessments 
on  the  various  candidates,  and  is  often  a  considerable 
burden.  It  'uill  be  seen  that  the  larger  the  number  of 
candidates,  the  smaller  will  be  their  individual  assess- 
ments, and  that  where  few  candidates  are  in  the  field  the 
assessments  are  correspondingly  heavy.  This  tends  to 
keep  capable  men  of  moderate  means,  when  unsupported 
by  moneyed  politicians,  out  of  the  contest  for  office. 

No  person  is  allowed  to  vote  imless  he  has  been  en- 
rolled on  the  Democratic  club  list  at  least  five  days  be- 
fore the  primary  election.  Any  white  person  twenty- 
one  years  of  age  may  become  a  member  in  a  Democratic 
club  by  proving  his  party  affiliations.  A  negro  en- 
counters many  difficulties.  He  "must  produce  a  written 
statement  of  ten  reputable  white  men,  who  shall  swear 
that  they  know,  of  their  own  knowledge,  that  the  appli- 
cant, or  voter,  voted  for  General  Hampton  in  1876,  and 
has  voted  the  Democratic  ticket  continuously  since."^ 

The  polls  are  to  be  open  from  8  o'clock  in  the  mom- 

>  Outlook,  September  10,  1808,  p.  146. 

•  Democratic  party  rules  adopted  June  7,  1894. 


In  South  Carolina.  135 

ing  to  4  o'clock  in  tlie  afternoon.  The  Democratic 
county  executive  committee  tabulates  the  returns  and 
declares  the  result  of  the  primary,  except  for  congress- 
men and  for  solicitors,  in  which  case  the  state  executive 
committee  makes  the  returns.  Majority  votes  are  re- 
quired for  the  nomination  of  candidates  and  for  the  se- 
lection of  delegates  to  the  state  convention.  A  second 
primary,  when  necessary,  is  called  at  least  two  weeks 
after  the  first  The  contest  is  in  such  cases  confined  to 
the  two  highest  candidates.  The  voter  is  well  satisfied 
with  this  arrangement.  His  additional  duty  is  limited 
to  a  second  trip  to  the  polls,  whereby  he  prevents  the 
"machine"  from  concentrating  its  vote  upon  an  undesir- 
able candidate  and  carrying  him  at  the  primaiy  on  a 
bare  plurality  vote.  But  the  extra  expense  falls  en- 
tirely upon  the  candidates,  and  is  a  severe  drain  upon 
their  funds.*  However,  the  provision  for  majority  nom- 
inations seems  to  operate  as  a  preventative  rather  than  as 
a  cure,  so  that  the  necessity  for  second  primaries  does 
not  frequently  arise. 

The  experience  with  the  press  seems  to  have  been  gen- 
erally favorable  in  South  Carolina.  Candidates  have  in 
the  main,  it  seems,  received  fair  treatment.  Extortion, 
such  as  is  claimed  was  practiced  in  Ohio,  does  not  ap- 
I)ear  to  have  been  resorted  to  by  the  newspapers.  There 
are  those,  however,  who  severely  arraign  the  South  Car- 
olina press.  Hence,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  arrive  at 
a  fair  conclusion  upon  this  matter  without  an  even  more 
extended  investigation  than  the  writer  was  able  to  make. 

0^\dng  to  the  overwhelming  strength  of  the  Demo- 

'  In  Mississippi  candidates  are  permitted  to  decide  beforehand  whether  a  ma- 
jority or  a  plurality  vote  bhall  nonainate. 


136  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

cratic  party  in  South  Carolina,  a  nominatioti  within  its 
ranks,  is  equivalent  to  an  election.  Because  of  this  de- 
cisive character  of  the  primary,  it  eclipses  the  general 
ele<;tion  both  in  the  interest  aroused  and  in  the  vote 
polled.  At  the  direct  primary  held  September  1,  1900, 
00,000  out  of  a  total  of  120,000  white  voters  cast  their 
ballots,  while  but  30,000  votes  were  polled  at  the  ensuing 
general  election.^  Certain  it  is,  that  in  the  North  and 
West,  and  wherever  parties  are  fairly  well  balanced,  a 
light  vote  at  the  general  election  would  rarely,  if  ever, 
occur,  because  of  the  risk  of  defeat  incurred  by  the 
party  whose  voters  failed  to  cast  a  full  votei. 

NOETH    CAI10I.IITA. 

No  direct  primary  law  has  as  yet  been  enacted  in 
North  Carolina,  but  in  accordance  with  a  resolution 
adopted  by  the  state  convention  of  1900,  the  Demo- 
cratic state  committee  issued  a  call  for  a  direct  primary 
for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the  United  States 
senate.  The  primary  was  held  on  the  day  of  the  presi- 
dential election,  and  authorized  all  white  voters  to  par- 
ticipate who  supported  the  Democratic  ticket  at  the  re- 
cent state  election,  or  who  intended  to  do  so  at  the  na- 
tional election.  The  results  of  this  trial  look  favorably 
to  an  extension  of  the  direct  vote  principle  in  this  State. 

ViBQINIA. 

In  Virginia  no  general  state  primary  election  law  has 
as  yet  been  put  in  operation.  Nor  is  there  any  com- 
pulsory law  applying  to  counties,     ISTumerous  optional 

>  Outlook,  September  8,  1900,  p.  91. 


In  Virginia.  137 

acts  regulating  direct  primaries  in  the  counties  have, 
however,  been  passed  within  recent  years,  all  of  which 
are  more  or  less  incomplete,  although  the  later  acts  of 
1896  nnd  1898  are  decided  improvements  over  those  of 
1892  and  1894.  The  act  of  1892  applied  to  the  city  of 
Portsmouth  in  Norfolk  county.^  It  empowered  candi- 
dates to  appoint  primary  election  officers,  and  to  pay 
them,  out  of  the  funds  provided  by  a  general  assess- 
ment of  all  candidates.  In  1894  an  act  was  passed  which 
legalized  primary  elections  in  the  city  of  Richmond  lo- 
cated in  Henrico  county."  The  main  provisions  of  this 
law  were  incorporated  in  the  more  complete  act  of  1896,^ 
applying  to  both  the  county  of  Henrico  and  the  city  of 
Richmond. 

Like  all  the  preceding  acts,  the  one  of  1896  was  op- 
tional, and  provided  for  spring  and  fall  primaries.  All 
supplementary  regulations — and  they  were  many — ^were 
to  be  prescribed  by  the  party  holding  the  primary.  The 
expense  also  fell  upon  the  party.  Three  primary  elec- 
tion officers  were  to  be  selected  by  the  county  judge  from 
lists  of  three  submitted  by  the  various  candidates.  They 
were  to  receive  two  dollars  for  their  ser\T.ces ;  were  re- 
quired to  act  under  oath ;  and  possessed  "all  rights,  pow- 
ers, and  privileges  of  general  election  officers."  One  of 
the  important  features  of  the  law  was  the  detailed  man- 
ner in  which  it  safeguarded  the  printing  of  ballots,  and 
their  distribution  to  ]X)lling  places  in  carefully  ascer- 
tained sealed  packages  which  were  not  to  be  opened  until 
the  day  of  the  primary  election. 

During  the  same  year  an  act  was  also  passed  legaliz- 

»  Session  Laws  of  Virginia,  1893,  p.  1039. 
'  Session  Laws  of  Virginia,  1S94,  yi.  417. 
*  Session  Laws  of  Virginia,  18116,  p.  414. 


138  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

ing  primaries  in  the  counties  of  Accomac  and  Nortli- 
hampton,  both  of  which  lie  on  the  peninsula.  This  act 
made  the  holding  of  direct  primaries  lawful  in  the  two 
counties,  and  charged  the  local  executive  committee  with 
the  prescription  of  party  rules  and  the  appointment  and 
pajonent  of  primary  election  officers  who  were  to  act 
under  oath.  A  notice  of  five  days  was  required  for  the 
holding  of  a  primary.  The  general  election  laws  were 
made  to  apply  as  far  as  practicable.  In  1898,  another 
and  last  act  was  passed  legalizing  primary  elections  for 
the  nomination  of  city  officers  in  the  city  of  Charlottes- 
ville, Albermarle  county.  Practically  the  entire  control 
and  regulation  of  the  primary  is  left  in  the  hands  of  the 
party,  and  primary  election  officers  are  made  responsible 
to  it  through  an  oath.  The  party  committee  is  given  ex- 
traordinary powers  by  being  vested  witJi  the  right  of 
making  up  its  own  list  of  voters,  and  the  fact  that  a  name 
appears  on  the  list  is  to  be  taken  as  prima  facie  evidence 
of  a  right  to  vote,  and  no  challenge  is  allowed.  Thus  a 
party  committee  can  determine  who  shall  and  who  shall 
not  vote  at  a  primary.  It  will  be  noticed  that  all  of  these 
acts  do  little  more  than  legalize  direct  primaries,  and 
provide  but  a  crude  and  imperfect  structure  for  the  op- 
eration of  a  system  created,  in  all  of  its  really  vital  feat- 
ures, by  the  party  authorities.  In  this  respect  the  Vir- 
ginia laws  are  quite  typical  of  southern  direct  primary 
legislation,  which  permits  party  rules  to  stand  where 
state  statutes  ought  to  control. 

Georgia. 

In  1887  an  act  was  passed  in  Georgia  which  plainly 
indicates  that  here,  as  in  many  other  States,  direct  pri- 
maries were  resorted  to  by  the  political  parties  before 


In  Georgia.  139 

they  were  in  any  way  recognized  by  statute.  This  act 
imposes  a  penalty  for  the  sale  of  liquor  on  primary  elec- 
tion day,  and  defines  a  primary  as  "an  election  by  bal- 
lot for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  office  as  op- 
posed to  nomination  by  conventions."^ 

The  act  of  1891  2  not  only  legalizes  the  holding  of  di- 
rect primaries,  but  also  provides  some  positive  rules  for 
their  conduct.  It  is  optional,  and  provides  that  all  pri- 
mary elections  held  by  any  political  party  for  the  pur- 
pose of  choosing  candidates  for  office,  or  for  the  election 
of  delegates  to  conventions,  are  to  be  conducted  in  a  man- 
ner prescribed  by  the  rules  of  the  political  party  and 
executed  through  managers  elected  by  the  party.  The 
managers  are  forced  to  swear  that  they  will  conduct  the 
primaries  in  accordance  \vith  the  provisions  of  this  act, 
and  also  in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  the  State  gov- 
erning regular  elections.  The  qualifications  of  voters 
are  determined  by  the  general  election  laws,  and  by  such 
additional  requirements  as  the  political  party  may  see  fit 
to  adopt.  Challenges  are  allowed.  The  notice  of  the 
primary  election  must  contain  the  time  and  place  of 
holding  the  same,  as  well  as  tlie  requirements  for  partici- 
pation in  it.  The  duties  of  the  primary  election  officers 
are  outlined,  penalties  for  their  violation  imposed,  and 
perjury  and  illegal  voting  punished.  This  act,  like  those 
in  force  in  neighboring  States,  leaves  all  important  rules 
to  be  prescribed  by  the  party  authorities.  In  accordance 
with  them  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation  is  required, 
and  the  expense  is  borne  by  the  candidates  through  as- 
sessments.   Because  of  this  latter  feature  the  direct  pri- 

>  Session  Laws  of  Georgia,  1887,  p.  42. 
«  Session  Laws  of  Georgia,  1891.  p.  210. 


140  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

marj  system  is  not  popular  witli  candidates  of  small 
means,  and  together  with  other  features  very  similar  to 
those  of  the  South  Carolina  system,  serves  to  entrench 
men  in  office  who  have  once  located  themselves  in  the 
public  service. 

Florida. 

An  optional  direct  primary  law  was  passed  in  Florida 
in  1897.^     It  must,  however,  be  rememl^ered  that  in 
many  States  direct  nominations  were  made  by  parties 
long  before  any  primary  laws  were  placed  upon  the  stat- 
ute books  for  their  control,  so  that  1897  does  not  neces- 
sarily indicate  the  year  in  which  the  direct  primary 
system  was  inaugurated  in  that  State.     According  to 
the  law,  twenty  days'  notice  must  be  given  whenever  the 
executive  committee  of  any  political  party  decides  to 
hold  a  primary  election.     In  case  the  executive  com- 
mittee fails  to  call  such  an  election,  and  the  majority  of 
the  qualified  electors  petition  it  to  do  so,  it  must  comply 
under  penalty  of  law.     To  participate  in  the  primary, 
general  election  qualifications  are  required,  but  the  exec- 
utive or  standing  committee  of  the  party  may  impose 
additional  qualifications  by  declaring  "the  terms  and 
conditions  on  which  legal  electors  shall  be  regarded  and 
taken  as  proper  members  of  the  party."     The  right  to 
challenge  is  assigned  to  every  member  of  the  party  hold- 
ing the  primary  election.     The  general   election   laws 
n])ply,  as  far  as  it  is  expedient,  to  regulate  the  compen- 
sation of  the  inspr^ctors  and  clerks,  and  to  provide  funds 
for  defraying  the  expense  of  conducting  the  election  by 
assessing  the  various  candidates  for  nomination.  The  act 

'  Session  Laws  of  Florida,  1897,  p.  62. 


In  Alabama  —  Mississipj)i.  1-11 

requires  that  the  notice  of  the  primary  election  state  the 
time  and  place  of  meeting  and  the  names  of  the  officers 
who  are  to  conduct  the  same.  It  defines  the  main  duties 
of  these  officers,  and  imposes  penalties  for  some  of  the 
most  common  corrupt  practices. 

Alabama. 

The  only  primary  election  act  upon  the  statute  hooks 
of  Alabama  was  passed  in  1899.^  It  is  optional.  Sec- 
tion nine  specially  provides  that  nothing  in  the  act  "is  to 
be  construed  as  making  primary  elections,  as  a  means  of 
selecting  the  nominees,  obligatory  upon  any  political 
party."  No  important  positive  rules  for  the  conduct  of 
primaries  are  laid  dowQ,  all  this  being  left  to  the  polit- 
ical party.  Certain  common  corrupt  practices  are  for- 
bidden; the  sale  of  liquor  is  made  a  criminal  offense; 
and  the  sheriff  is  ordered  to  maintain  peace  and  order  at 
the  polls.  The  rules  adopted  by  the  Democratic  party  in 
the  State  closely  resemble  those  of  South  Carolina,  which 
were  given  as  generally  typical  of  the  primary  election 
regulations  of  the  southern  States. 

Mississippi. 

The  Mississippi  direct  primary  law  is  option al.^ 
Whenever  a  state,  district,  or  county  committee  shall 
order  a  party  primary  election  to  be  held,  the  executive 
committee  of  the  county  is  compelled,  at  least  thirty 
days  prior  to  the  time  designated  for  holding  the  elec- 
tion, to  appoint  the  officers  to  conduct  the  same,  who 

'  Session  Laws  of  Alabama,  1899,  p.  126. 

a  Annotated  Codes  of  Mississippi,  1892,  ch.  105. 


142  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

shall  fairly  represent  the  different  factions  witliin  the 
party  ranks,  if  there  are  any.  The  committee  directing 
the  primary  is  empowered  by  its  rules  and  regulations 
to  determine  the  qualifications  requisite  for  participation 
in  the  primary  "as  a  proper  member  of  the  political 
party."  Challenges  are  allowed.  A  majority  of  votes 
is  required  to  nominate,  unless  all  candidates  for  any 
office  agree  beforehand  that  the  one  receiving  a  plu- 
ralitv  of  the  votes  cast  shall  be  declared  the  nominee. 
When  a  majority  is  required  and  no  one  is  elected,  a  sec- 
ond primary  is  held  in  which  the  votes  are  confined  to 
the  two  candidates  who  ranked  the  highest  at  the  first 
primary.  Contests  are  decided  by  the  proper  executive 
committee.  The  general  election  laws  are  in  force  as 
far  as  applicable.  No  official  ballots  are  required,  nor 
are  they  paid  for  at  the  public  expense,  but  the  voters 
may  procure  their  own  ballots.  Voting  booths  or  stalls 
are  not  required.  Delegates  are  so  prorated  as  to  repre- 
sent as  near  as  possible  the  popular  vote  cast  in  the  pri- 
mary election,  and  when  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion 
or  choice  among  the  members  of  the  party,  each  faction 
shall  have  its  proportion  of  representation  in  the  county 
convention.  As  the  party  county  committee  has  ex- 
traordinary powers  under  this  statute,  a  provision  is 
made  that  on  petition  of  one-fifth  of  the  members  of  a 
party,  this  committee  shall  be  elected ;  otherwise  it  is  to 
be  chosen  "as  the  party  may  determine."  Since  by 
"party"  here  is  meant  "party  authority"  it  is  evident 
that  the  committee  might,  without  this  provision,  prac- 
tically perpetuate  itself,  and  regulate  the  primary  elec- 
tions at  will. 

The  Mississippi  law  presents  several  new  features: 


In  Louisiana.  143 

The  election  of  the  most  imi^ortaut  party  committee  on 
petition  by  the  voters;  the  use  of  an  unofficial  ballot; 
minority  and  fractional  representation  in  conventions; 
and  majority  nominations,  or,  at  the  choice  of  the  candi- 
dates themselves,  plurality  nominations.  It  has  been 
impossible  to  obtain  definite  information  from  any  re- 
liable sources  as  to  the  working  of  these  interesting  pro- 
visions. But  the  fact  that  no  voting  booths  or  stalls  or 
official  ballots  are  required  by  law,  together  with  other 
weak  points,  does  not  speak  for  gi-eat  success.  Yet  it  is 
claimed  that  the  direct  vote  system  is  an  improvement 
upon  the  old  convention  plan,  and  while  the  defects  in 
the  law  necessarily  militate  against  the  best  results  that 
might  be  attained,  it,  nevertheless,  has  suffidently  dem- 
onstrated the  advantages  of  the  direct  vote  principle  to 
give  it  a  secure  place  in  the  nominating  institutions  of 
Mississippi. 

LotriSTANA. 

In  1900,  the  legislature  of  Louisiana  passed  a  law  en- 
titled, "An  act  to  preserve  the  purity  of  primary  elec- 
tions."^ This  appears  to  have  been  the  first  enactment 
concerning  primaries  placed  upon  the  statute  books  of 
that  State,  although  the  Democratic  party  has  nominated 
its  officers  under  the  direct  vote  plan  for  a  number  of 
years.  Under  this  act  the  holding  of  direct  primaries  is 
optional  with  any  political  party  which  polled  at  least 
ten  per  cent,  of  the  entire  vote  at  the  last  preceding  elec- 
tion. Aside  from  the  imposition  of  penalties  for  fraud, 
perjury,  intimidation,  and  other  corrupt  practices,  a 
few  positive  rules  are  laid  down.    There  are  to  be  from 

>  Session  Laws  of  Louisiana,  1900,  p.  303. 


144  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

three  to  five  election  officers,^  wlio  must  be  qualified 
voters,  and  who  are  to  be  selected  as  equally  as  possible 
among  opposing  factions,  or  individuals,  and  are  bound 
by  the  regulations  of  the  political  party  for  which  they 
act.  Great  stress  is  laid  by  the  law  upon  the  form  of  the 
call  for  a  primary  election.  Such  a  call  must  give  the 
time  and  place;  the  names  of  the  conducting  officers; 
the  object  of  the  election ;  and  the  qualifications  required 
of  voters  in  addition  to  those  prescribed  by  the  general 
election  law,  and  by  the  Constitution  of  the  State.  Be- 
fore issuing  a  call,  the  political  party  must  adopt  a  reso- 
lution which  shall  set  forth  that  the  state  central  com- 
mittee, and  the  various  district  and  parish  conmiittees, 
calling  the  primary  election,  shall  have  the  power  to 
adopt  such  rules  and  regulations  for  its  conduct,  as  they 
may  deem  fit,  provided  this  act  is  not  violated.  These 
regulations  are  thus  given  the  force  of  law,  and  enable 
unscrupulous  party  authorities  to  play  the  part  of 
tyrants,  by  exercising  their  unlimited  power  of  determin- 
ing who  shall  participate  in  the  primaries. 

Texas. 

The  only  legislation  bearing  upon  direct  primaries  in 
Texas  is  the  act  of  1895,  which  merely  recognizes  and 
legalizes  the  direct  nomination  system  by  defining  and 
punishing  some  of  the  most  frequent  corrupt  practices 
"at  any  primary  election  called  and  held  by  authority  of 
any  political  pariy  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candi- 
dates for  office,"  A  great  many  counties  throughout  the 
State  have  adopted  the  primary  election  system  for  the 
nomination  of  candidates,  and  also  for  the  selection  and 


In  Texas.  1^15 

instruction  of  delegates  to  conventions.  These  elections 
are  supposed  to  be  held  under  the  general  election  laws 
as  far  as  possible,  but  the  Australian  ballot  is  in  use  only 
in  cities  of  10,000  population  and  over,  and  the  great 
leeway  given  to  political  parties  makes  the  primary  act 
of  1895  practically  a  dead  letter.  The  operation  of  the 
inefficient  statute  of  1895,  under  the  imperfect  general 
election  laws  of  Texas,  has  not  been  generally  satisfac- 
tory.^ 

'  Correspondence  Secretaiy  of  State,  Texas. 
10 


CHAPTER  Y. 

DIRECT    PRIMARIES    WHICH    ARE    REGULATED 
LARGELY    BY    PARTY   RULES. 

Pennsylvania. 

In  Pennsylvania  no  complete  primary  election  law 
has  as  yet  been  enacted.  The  only  laws  of  general  ap- 
plication throughout  the  State  were  placed  upon  the  stat- 
ute books  in  1881  and  1883.  The  act  of  1881  aims  at 
the  prevention  of  bribery  and  fraud  at  primary  elec- 
tions, and  binds  the  primary  officers  by  an  oath  to  act 
in  accordance  with  the  law  of  the  State,  and  with  the 
rules  of  the  political  party.  ^  Penalties  for  violations  of 
the  law  or  of  the  party  rules  are  imposed.  The  law  is  a 
mere  farce,  and  its  regulations  are  regarded  only  when 
it  suits  the  majority.^ 

The  act  of  1883  is  an  amendment  of  the  previous  law 
and  penalizes  the  furnishing  of  fraudulent  tickets  at 
general  or  primary  elections.^  Aside  from  these  im- 
perfect general  laws,  several  local  acts  applying  to  coun- 
ties have  been  in  operation  for  about  thirty  years.  They 
are  very  impei'f  ect,  and  leave  the  prescribing  of  the  main 
primary  regulations  in  the  hands  of  the  political  parties. 
A  number  of  counties  use  the  direct  vote  system,  each 
operating  it  under  its  own  party  rules,  which  in  some 
cases  are  pre'^erved  in  pamphlet  form,  but  more  gen- 
erally are  unwritten,  and  are  proven  by  oral  testimony 

'  Session  Laws  of  Pennsylvania,  1881,  p.  128. 

'  Correspondence. 

»  Session  Laws  of  Pennsylvania,  1883,  p.  92. 


In  Pennsylvania.  147 

in  case  of  contests.-^  In  other  counties  nominations  are 
made  by  conventions,  pure  and  simple,  each  delegate 
having  one  vote ;  while  in  still  others,  a  combination  sys- 
tem prevails,  by  which  the  nominations  are  also  made  in 
conventions,  but  each  delegate  votes  the  total  number  of 
votes  polled  in  his  district  by  the  party  at  the  preceding 
state  election. 

It  is  in  Crawford  county,  Pennsylvania,  that  the  his- 
toric Crawford  county  system  of  direct  primaries  was 
first  put  in  operation,  about  the  year  1868.  From  1868 
to  1872  there  was  considerable  agitation  in  Pennsyl- 
vania looking  to  popular  primaries.  So  great  was  the 
demand  for  better  methods  of  nomination  that  the  Union 
League  of  Philadelphia  offered  high  prizes  for  essays  on 
the  subject.  Two  counties  took  the  lead — Crawford  and 
Delaware  on  the  northeastern  and  southeastern  extremes 
of  the  State.  They  adopted  different  systems.  Craw- 
ford county  looked  only  to  the  popular  vote  and  left  this 
unchecked.  The  primary  ticket  was  voted  for  as  a 
whole,  no  one  office  bearing  any  apparent  relation  to  the 
other.  ^ 

This  time-honored  system  has  grown  famous  as  the 
first  instance  of  a  nomination  of  public  officers  by  direct 
vote  of  the  party  members.  There  can  be  but  little  doubt 
that  the  first  trial  of  the  principle  of  direct  nomination 
was  made  in  Pennsylvania,  although  an  act  regulating 
primary  elections  was  enacted  in  California  in  1866,^ 
just  two  years  before  the  inauguration  of  the  system  in 

'  Correspondence  of  George  W.  Guthrie,  Pittsburgh. 

'  Mr.  Cooper,  editor  of  Delaware  Co.  American,  and  author  of  American  Poli- 
tics, quoted  in  Wisconsin  State  Journal,  Sept.  4,  1901. 

*  See  Session  Laws  of  California,  1666,  p.  438;  also  discussion  under  bead  of 
California. 


148  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

Pennsylvania.  The  California  law  was  the  first  primary 
election  law  passed  in  this  country,  but  it  does  not  seem 
to  have  regulated  direct  primaries,  for,  from  its  wording, 
as  well  as  from  contemporary  discussions  in  the  San 
Francisco  Bulletin,  the  plausible  inference  may  be 
drawn  that  direct  primaries  had  not  been  in  operation 
anywhere  in  the  State  prior  to  the  enactment  of  the  law. 
However,  this  is  a  matter  of  but  historic  interest.  What 
is  of  more  importance  at  present  is  the  practicability  of 
the  principle  involved.  In  recent  discussions,  the  old- 
time  experiences  of  our  forefathers  with  the  Crawford 
direct  primaries,  have  sometimes  been  advanced  as  valid 
arguments  both  jyro  and  con.  Great  care  is  necessary 
in  presenting  such  statements,  for  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  Crawford  system  of  1868  had  about  as 
little  in  common  with  our  modern  direct  primary  sys- 
tems operating  under  detailed  laws,  such  as  the  Henne- 
pin county  system,  as  had  Noah's  ark  with  our  modem 
ocean  steamers.  Both  were  based  upon  a  common  prin- 
ciple, and  operated  for  a  common  purpose,  but  further 
their  resemblance  can  be  carried  only  with  great  diffi- 
culty and  circumspection. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  several  local  pri- 
mary election  laws.  One  of  these  is  found  in  Crawford 
county.  It  was  passed  in  1872,  four  years  after  the  first 
trial  of  the  system.  It  provided  that  primary  election 
officers  take  an  oath  faithfully  to  perform  their  duties  in 
accordance  with  the  party  regulations.  Primary  election 
judges  were  compelled  to  entertain  objections  to  votes 
that  were  offered,  and  where  a  challenge  was  made  they 
were  to  interrogate  the  person  challenged  under  oath. 
A  penalty  was  imposed  for  false  swearing.    The  act  was 


In  Pennsylvania.  149 

optional,  and  could  be  adopted  by  vote  of  the  party  ex- 
ecutive committee,  or  it  might  be  submitted  by  the  com- 
mittee to  a  vote  of  the  party.  It  will  be  noticed  that  this 
law  is  very  incomplete,  but  better  than  none  at  all.  Since 
no  general  law  regulating  primaries  exists  in  the  State, 
and  since  no  amendment  to  the  local  act  just  outlined 
was  passed,  the  Crawford  county  primaries  have  been 
mainly  a  party  affair,  and  as  such,  subject  to  all  the 
machinations,  electioneering,  and  corruption  that  find 
their  way  into  extra-legal  party  activity. 

Concerning  the  experiences  with  the  system,  Mr. 
Cooper,  before  quoted,  writes  somewhat  as  follows: 
"The  direct  vote  plan  certainly  was  forced  to  operate 
under  insuperable  difiiculties  in  this  county.  There 
were  several  cities  of  considerable  size,  the  tremendous 
development  of  the  oil  fields  was  creating  millionaires 
by  the  year,  and  the  large  proportion  of  dependent  labor- 
ing population  gave  every  opportunity  for  corruption 
and  for  the  purchase  of  votes  by  candidates.  .  .  .  The 
writer  could  name  three  score  and  ten  who  struggled  in 
this  way  (buying  votes),  now  winning,  now  losing,  and 
always  losing  to  the  richer  man.  Under  this  system  in 
a  county  with  several  very  populous  towns,  discontent 
followed  because  of  the  greed  of  the  towns.  These  could 
pool  their  votes  and  'get  away'  with  the  leading  offices, 
.  .  In  strictly  farming  communities  containing  no 
great  towns  or  cities,  and  having  few,  if  any,  very 
wealthy  men,  the  Crawford  county  system  is  an  ideal 
one,  for  it  is  jree  and  ought  to  be  honest"  In  addition 
to  the  purchase  of  votes,  and  the  domination  of  populous 
centers  through  the  concentration  of  candidates,  fraud- 
ulent voting,  and  minority  nominations,  were  also  quite 
common. 


150  Direct  Priiyiary  Legislation. 

Similar  experiences  were  encountered  in  California,* 
and  elsewhere,  where  the  Crawford  system  based  upon 
freedom  and  honesty  in  politics  was  tried. 

Mr.  Cooper's  statement  that  the  Crawford  system  is 
the  ideal  one  in  farming  communities  having  few 
wealthy  men,  because  it  is  free  and  ought  to  be  honest, 
is  certainly  true,  and  seems  tinged  by  an  unconscious 
stroke  of  irony.  In  a  community  where  politics  is  simple 
and  honest,  and  where  wealth  does  not  abound,  there  is 
no  reason  why  a  "free"  convention  system  should  not 
succeed,  as  well  as  a  free  direct  vote  system,  or  any  other. 
The  Crawford  system  was  not  a  success  because  of  its 
great  "freedom"  from  legislative  control.  It  merely  sub- 
stituted a  "free"  primary  for  a  free  convention,  leaving 
its  operation  just  as  before  in  the  hands  of  the  control- 
ling corrupting  forces  within  the  parties.  The  very  pur- 
pose of  the  system  was  to  remedy  the  political  evils 
where  populations  were  concentrated,  where  wealth  was 
plenty,  and  where  honesty  was  rare.  There  was  great 
need  of  the  strong  hand  of  the  State  acting  through  a 
complete  primaiy  law,  depriving  politicians  of  that  free- 
dom which  is  license  and  abuse,  and  restoring  to  every 
citizen  true  liberty,  which  he  might  maintain  through 
the  prompt  performance  of  his  duties  at  a  legally  pro- 
tected primary. 

Two  years  after  the  inauguration  of  the  direct  vote 
system  in  Crawford  county  it  was  also  adopted  in  the 
county  of  Lancaster.  Here  the  "single  delegate  system," 
i.  e.,  a  delegate  to  each  voting  district  according  to  vot- 
ing strength,  was  displaced.  This  latter  plan  had  led  to 
constant  quarrels  between  the  little  and  big  districts,  the 

>  California  correspondent  in  New  York  Nation,  Jan.  26,  1882. 


In  Pennsylvania.  151 

little  districts  refusing  to  concede  representation  propor- 
tioned to  the  number  of  voters,  and  when  the  chance  was 
presented  the  greater  numbers  compelled  the  adoption  of 
the  Crawford  system  in  1870.  One  year  later  the  legis- 
lature of  Pennsylvania  passed  the  first  local  primary  act, 
which  was  also  the  first  direct  primary  law  enacted  in 
this  country.  It  legalized  the  direct  vote  system  in  the 
county  of  Lancaster.^  This  is  the  original  law  from 
which  the  Crawford  county  law  of  1872  seems  to  have 
been  taken  as  an  exact  copy.  Since  the  imperfections 
of  the  latter  have  already  been  discussed,  it  will  be  un- 
necessary to  dwell  upon  them  again  here.  In  1872  an 
act  amendatory  of  the  Lancaster  act  of  1871  was  passed, 
which  provided  that  the  primary  officers  might  admin- 
ister the  oath  to  each  other,  and  that  the  president  of  the 
returns  and  the  judges  and  clerks  had  to  be  sworn. ^ 

Delaware  county  has  already  been  mentioned  as  hav- 
ing adopted  a  new  system  of  nomination  contemporane- 
ously with  Crawford  county.  Experience  seems  to  have 
proven  the  system  a  very  creditable  device.  It  enjoyed 
the  distinction  of  comprising  all  the  virtues  of  delegate 
representation  together  with  the  popular  vote.  The  dele- 
gates were  appointed  according  to  the  number  of  voters. 
The  latter  instructed  them  for  first  and  second  choice  as 
to  all  candidates.  The  returns  of  the  elections  were  sent 
with  the  instruction  certificates  in  advance  to  the  chair- 
man of  the  convention,  and  if  a  delegate  \dolated  his  in- 
structions the  chairman  was  directed  in  the  presence  of 
the  whole  convention  to  cast  the  vote  in  his  place.  Taken 
in   connection  with  the  state   primary  statute,   which 

'  Session  Laws  of  Pennsylvania,  1871,  p.  1001. 
*  Session  Laws  of  Pennsylvania,  1872,  p.  96. 


152  Direct  Pi'imary  Legislation, 

makes  the  primary  rules  of  the  party  law,  it  was  the  best 
of  all  the  systems  known.  Bradford,  Chester,  and  many 
other  counties  adopted  it.-^ 

Here  we  have  a  strong  argum.ent  in  favor  of  the  direct 
primary,  for  experience  proved  that  where  the  delegates 
were  forced  to  vote  as  the  people  wanted  them,  where 
they  were  mere  machines,  or  "living  ballots,"  through 
which  the  people  chose  the  candidates  that  they  deemed 
fit  for  office,  good  men  were  elected.  In  other  words,  the 
people  proved  themselves  competent  to  select  competent 
officers.  Moreover,  since  the  delegates  voted  according 
to  the  numerical  strength  of  their  constituents,  the  re- 
sult could  not  have  been  materially  different  from  that 
of  a  direct  primary  vote,  while  the  first  and  second 
choice  feature^  of  the  system  insured  the  election  of  the 
most  desired  men. 

One  criticism,  however,  may  be  passed  upon  this  sys- 
tem of  nomination,  because  of  the  fact  that  the  delegates 
can  exercise  no  free  choice,  but  are  absolutely  bound  to 
the  support  of  particular  men.  What  is  the  need  of  dele- 
gates and  of  conventions,  when  the  nominations  have  to 
all  intents  and  purposes  been  determined  by  popular 
vote  at  the  primaries?  This  machinery  seems  super- 
fluous, and  an  unnecessary  burden,  for  the  same  results 
could  probably  have  been  effected  through  the  substitu- 
tion of  a  direct  primary  ballot  for  a  living,  instructed, 
delegate  ballot.  Why  take  the  time  and  money  of  busy 
men  to  act  as  delegates  ?  Why  run  the  chances  of  mis- 
understandings :  of  a  substitution  of  fraudulent  instruc- 
tions; of  mistakes  on  part  of  the  chairman;  of  his  cor- 

'  Cooper  in  Wisconsin  State  Journal,  Sept.  4,  1901. 

»  See  close  of  chapter  m,  Part  m,  for  disfussion  on  first  and  second  choice. 


In  Pennsylvania.  153 

Tiiption  or  deception,  and  the  countless  other  contin- 
gencies that  might  arise  and  defeat  the  successful  oper- 
ation of  the  system  ?  There  is  a  real  positive  danger 
lurking  in  nomination  machinery  of  this  stamp  as  has 
already  been  indicated.^ 

In  1872  the  provisions  of  the  Cravt^ford  county  act  of 
the  same  year  were  also  extended  to  the  county  of  Erie, 
\vhere  political  conditions  proved  more  favorable  to  di- 
rect primaries.  In  1879  a  local  act  applying  to  Beaver 
county  was  passed.  It  differed  from  the  preceding  acts 
in  that  it  was  somewhat  less  complete  in  some  respects, 
but  contained  an  improvement  by  providing  a  formal 
oath  for  primary  officers,  by  imposing  penalties  for  act- 
ing without  being  sworn,  for  a  violation  of  party  rules, 
for  the  illegal  rejection  or  acceptance  of  votes,  stuffing 
of  ballot  boxes,  and  the  like. 

In  Lackawanna  county  direct  primaries  have  been 
used  for  the  Republican  party  since  1898,  although  no 
act  regulating  them  appears  on  the  statute  books.  Party 
organization  is  maintained  as  follows:^  The  precinct 
vigilance  and  executive  committees  are  elected  by  the 
voters.  The  county  committee  is  chosen  by  the  candi- 
dates and  the  chairman  of  the  county  convention.  It  has 
the  power  of  fixing  the  date  for  annual  primaries ;  of  as- 
sessing the  candidates  in  proportion  to  the  "term  and 
emoluments"  of  the  office  for  the  defrayal  of  pri- 
mary election  expenses;  and  of  prescribing  the  primary 
rules.  Under  the  present  rules  all  Republicans  who  voted 
at  the  last  preceding  primary,  or  who  will  come  of  age 
before  the  next  election,  may  participate  at  the  polls  of 

'  See  Part  I,  chapter  V. 

'  Lackawanna  County  Eepublican  Primary  rules. 


154  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

the  party  primary.  Challenges  are  allowed,  and  a  sworn 
declaration  of  affiliation  with  the  party  is  required  as  a 
successful  answer. 

The  multiformity  of  the  primary  systems  which  are  in 
operation  in  Pennsylvania,  and  the  almost  entire  absence 
of  legal  control,  have  given  rise  to  much  dissatisfaction. 
Rules  differ  from  county  to  county,  and  every  party  is 
its  own  master  in  their  prescription.  A  voter's  change 
of  residence  necessitates  his  familiarization  with  new 
methods  of  voting,  while  the  possibilities  of  an  abuse  of 
power  on  part  of  the  controlling  spirits  of  the  party  or- 
ganization have  proven  many.  The  grievances  of  the 
voter  at  the  party  primary  have  been  growing  rapidly  of 
late  because  of  these  conditions,  and  the  result  has 
been  a  wide  and  spreading  agitation  in  favor  of  legally 
controlled  direct  primaries.  During  the  last  campaign 
in  Pennsylvania  the  various  political  leaders  promised 
their  followers  support  to  measures  for  the  reform  of 
both  the  general  and  the  primary  election  laws.-^  Com- 
mittees have  been  appointed  to  draft  direct  primary 
bills,  while  numerous  enthusiasts  of  the  primary  reform 
movement  have  set  themselves  at  similar  tasks,  and  have 
disseminated  their  ideas  of  reform  throughout  the  State. 
The  outcome  will  probably  be  the  early  enactment  of 
practical  direct  primary  legislation. 

Ohio. 

In  the  State  of  Ohio  the  direct  vote  system  was  used 
by  the  political  parties^  long  before  any  law  for  its  reg- 
ulation was  enacted.    It  did  not  include  nominations  for 

>  Correspondence  of  Arthur  Dunn,  Scranton,  Pa. 
*  Mainly  the  Republican  party. 


In  Ohio.  155 

state  offices,  Lut  was  confined  excliisivolj  to  certain  conn- 
ties, — mainly  those  including  the  larger  cities  of  the 
State.  ^  The  primaries  being  left  entirely  under  the 
control  of  the  parties  without  statutory  legislation,  there 
soon  developed  numerous  abuses  as  a  result  of  factional 
difficulties  and  fraudulent  voting.  These  were  most  pro- 
nounced in  the  larger  cities,  and  finally  demanded  the 
intervention  of  the  State.  As  a  result  the  direct  pri- 
mary law  of  1898  was  put  upon  the  statute  books. ^ 

This  law  is  optional,  and  provides  for  the  holding  of 
primary  or  nominating  elections  by  the  two  political  par- 
ties for  whose  candidates  the  largest  number  of  votes 
were  cast  for  offices  of  the  State,  at  the  last  preceding 
election,  in  cities  of  the  first  grade  of  the  first  class,  and 
in  any  county  containing  such  a  city,  for  the  nomination 
of  county,  township,  municipal,  or  judicial  officers,  or 
members  of  the  assembly,  representatives  in  Congress, 
and  members  of  central  or  executive  committees.  These 
provisions  limit  the  act  to  the  Democratic  and  Eepubli- 
can  parties  in  Hamilton  and  Cuyahoga  counties  in  which 
lie  the  cities  of  Cincinnati  and  Cleveland  respectively. 
There  are  to  be  fall  and  spring  primaries  held  one  month 
before  the  general  elections.  The  polls  are  to  be  open 
from  six  o'clock  in  the  morning  to  two  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon,  except  in  townships  and  villages  where  they 
may  close  at  ten  o'clock  in  the  morning.  xVny  other  polit- 
ical party,  besides  the  two  strongest,  may  hold  primaries 
under  the  law  with  the  approval  of  the  board  of  elec- 
tions. Each  party  participating  in  the  elections  is  pro- 
vided with  its  own  ballot  boxes  and  distinct  ballots. 
Candidates  are  required  to  file  petitions  signed  by  at 

1  Cuyahoga  (Cleveland),  Franklin  (Columbus),  Hamilton  (Cincinnati). 
»  Session  Laws  of  Ohio,  1898,  p.  652 


156  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

least  ten  per  cent,  of  the  electors  in  case  of  precinct  of- 
fices, by  five  per  cent,  in  case  of  ward  or  township  offices, 
and  by  300  voters  in  case  of  city  or  county  offices,  and  for 
congressmen.  In  order  to  participate  in  the  elections, 
it  is  necessary  to  be  a  legally  qualified  voter,  and  no 
person  is  considered  a  member  of  any  political  party 
for  the  purpose  of  voting  at  its  primaries,  unless  he  has 
before  openly  affiliated  with  the  party. 

The  executive  committee  of  the  party  must  each  year 
by  a  majority  vote  decide  whether  nominations  are  to  be 
made  by  direct  primaries,  or  by  conventions,  and  unless 
this  committee  gives  a  notice  to  the  board  of  elections 
at  least  seventy-five  days  before  the  day  fixed  by  law 
for  the  holding  of  primary  elections  in  September,  or 
sixty  days  before  those  in  March,  that  the  party  desires 
to  elect  delegates  to  a  nominating  convention,  then  the 
candidates  must  be  nominated  by  direct  vote.  If  con- 
ventions are  to  be  held,  all  delegates  must  be  chosen  by 
direct  vote.  Vacancies  in  nominations  are  to  be  filled 
by  the  proper  executive  committee  of  the  party.  When, 
no  petition  has  been  filed  for  placing  names  on  the  of- 
ficial ballot  in  behalf  of  a  political  party,  then  no  elec- 
tion is  held  by  that  party.  The  primary  election  officers 
receive  five  dollars  per  day  for  their  services,  and  are  ap- 
pointed by  the  board  of  elf  3tions,  which  body  also  prints 
the  ballots,  and  appoints  the  clerks  to  receive  them.  The 
general  election  laws  are  extended  to  the  primaries  as 
far  as  applicable.  Under  this  law  the  direct  primaries 
of  the  two  counties  mentioned,  are  still  conducted.  How 
far  it  has  been  adopted  by  the  other  counties  which  use 
the  direct  vote  system,^  was  not  ascertained.     Sentiment 

>  Franklin,  Lucas,  Crawford,  Montgomery,  Clark,  Champaign,  Fayette,  Mad- 
ison. 


In  Ohio.  157 

appears  to  be  in  favor  of  a  more  general  and  compulsory 
law. 

Since  the  Cleveland  system  of  direct  primaries  is  con- 
siderably quoted  in  discussions  upon  tbe  question  of 
primary  elections,  it  may  be  well  to  investigate  briefly 
some  of  the  main  results  of  its  operation.  The  system 
has  been  used  by  the  Republican  party  almost  continu- 
ously since  1887/  while  the  Democratic  party  has  gen- 
erally made  its  nominations  through  conventions,  ex- 
cept in  the  year  1901,  when  it  also  adopted  the  direct  pri- 
mary. One  of  the  more  or  less  unusual  difficulties  which 
the  system  encountered  in  Cleveland  was  the  tendency 
toward  factional  politics.^  Xot  that  the  system  itself 
was  productive  of  turbulent  politics,  but  that  it  was 
forced  to  operate  where  a  spirit  of  discord  and  hostility 
commonly  seemed  to  prevail  among  the  local  political 
leaders.  Since  the  law  of  1898  applies  in  this  city,  it  is 
unnecessary  to  recount  the  characteristics  of  the  plan. 
It  must  be  said,  however,  that  while  the  requirements 
of  the  law  are  good  as  far  as  they  go,  they  are  not  com- 
plete, and  are  but  incidental  to  other  important  features 
which  must  be  incorporated  in  law  before  a  fair  trial  of 
the  principle  involved  can  be  secured.  As  things  were, 
the  operation  of  the  system  was  only  partly  satisfactory. 
Owing  to  the  prevalence  of  party  dissensions,  minority 
nominations  were  complained  of,  and  party  unity  was 
constantly  threatened  through  the  factional  control  of 
party  organization.  A  redeeming  feature,  however, 
demonstrated  itself  in  the  fact  that  the  Eepubliean  plu- 
ralities at  the  general  election  have  increased  from  an 


•  In  1892  nominations  were  made  by  convention. 
»  Outlook,  September  24,  1893,  p.  251. 


158  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

average  of  about  2,500,  to  about  Y,500,  since  tlie  adop- 
tion of  tbe  system.^ 

Another  difficulty  was  encountered  in  tbe  form  of 
fraudulent  voting.  The  absence  of  a  proper  registration 
and  enrollment  plan,  has  allowed  of  the  practice  of  bring- 
ing Democrats  to  Kepublican  primaries  in  order  to  de- 
cide factional  fights.^  At  the  primary  election  for 
mayor  held  February  21, 1901,  the  total  vote  cast  for  the 
four  men  running  was  31,736,  while  at  the  general  elec- 
tion which  followed  they  received  but  29,758  votes,  or 
1,978  fewer  than  were  cast  at  the  primaries.  The  infer- 
ence, it  is  claimed,  was  that  a  large  number  of  voters  par- 
ticipated in  the  primaries  who  did  not  intend  to  vote 
the  Republican  ticket  at  the  general  election.  The  direct 
vote  system,  however,  clearly  showed  that  the  interest 
of  the  voter  in  nominations  is  greatly  increased,  and  that 
the  men  chosen  are  more  representative  than  imder  the 
convention  plan.  Under  the  latter,  5,173  votes  were 
cast  at  the  Republican  primaries  in  1892.  The  next 
year,  under  the  direct  vote  plan,  14,123  votes  were  cast; 
in  1896,  23,965;  and  at  the  spring  primary  in  1899, 
28,000.  All  this  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  primary 
elections  were  not  held  on  registration  day,  which  v/ould 
undoubtedly  have  increased  the  total  turn-out. 

The  objectionable  experiences  encountered  under  the 

system,  may  fairly  be  attributed  to  the  imperfection  of 

the  act  of  1898  which  governs  its  operation.  Several 
desirable  improvements  in  the  law  may  be  suggested.    In 

the  first  place,  it  should  be  mandatory  throughout  the 

State,  thereby  placing  all  parties  upon  the  same  plane, 

>  The  system  has  been  in  operation  since  1887.  How  much  of  this  increase  is 
represented  by  the  growth  in  population  and  the  resulting  increase  in  the  total 
number  of  votes  cast? 

«  Outlook,  September  24,  1898,  p.  252. 


In  Ohio.  159 

with  the  same  modus  operandi,  which  in  time  would  be- 
come familiar  to  all  citizens.  Second,  primary  election 
day  and  registration  day  should  be  made  concurrent. 
At  present  tlie  party  dictates  the  time  of  the  primary, 
with  the  result  that  the  attendance,  while  larger  than 
under  the  convention  system,  is  often  very  light,  and 
made  up  principally  of  office-seekers,  office-holders,  and 
their  friends.  Annual  registration  days  are  known  to  call 
out  more  voters  than  does  election  day,  and  if  the  voters 
were  enabled  to  perform  the  duties  of  registration  and 
of  primary  voting  on  the  same  day,  the  attendance  at 
the  polls  would  undoubtedly  be  greatly  increased. 
Third,  in  order  to  prevent  fraudulent  voting  by  members 
of  opposing  parties,  a  thorough  enrollment  plan  ought 
to  be  adopted  under  which  a  permanent  party  roll  is  kept 
revised  and  corrected  and  up  to  date,  at  all  times,  with 
the  provision  that  enrollment  is  the  qualification  for  par- 
ticipation in  the  primary.  In  this  way  party  lines  would 
be  kept  intact,  and  party  votes  would  be  fairly  repre- 
sented. Fourth,  the  foregoing  improvements  would 
make  the  selection  of  party  committeemen  at  the  pri- 
mary preferable  to  their  choice  by  delegates  to  a  county 
convention,  and  would  tend  to  overcome  the  subjection 
of  party  organization  to  factional  control.  The  neces- 
sity of  a  more  perfect  law  seems  to  be  generally  felt,  and 
last  year  resulted  in  the  introduction  of  a  bill  into  the 
legislature  incorporating  some  of  the  important  improve- 
ments which  have  been  suggested.^  Although  this  bill 
was  defeated  it  plainly  demonstrated  that  there  is  a  grow- 
ing sentiment  in  favor  of  a  more  thorough  direct  vote 
system  which  will  overcome  the  difficulties  of  the  present 
system. 

»  OuUook,  February  17,  1900. 


160  Duect  Primat'y  Legislation. 

Tennessee. 

In  Tennessee  no  direct  primary  law  has  as  yet  "been 
enacted,  but  direct  vote  systems  originating  with  the  par- 
ties, have  been  in  operation  in  a  number  of  counties  of 
the  State.  These  systems  are  very  similar  to  those  in 
operation  in  certain  counties  of  Ohio  and  Indiana.  They 
are  used  especially  by  the  Republicans  in  their  strong- 
hold in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State.  Since  these  sys- 
tems have  no  legal  sanction,  there  is  no  safeguard  against 
fraud,  except  the  honor  of  the  party  managers.  The 
consequence  has  frequently  been  that  grave  wrongs  were 
done  for  which  there  was  no  remedy  save  factional  re- 
pudiation. The  expenses  are  borne  by  the  candidates. 
The  congressional  committee  calls  the  primaries  and 
fixes  the  time  for  holding  them,  as  well  as  the  rules  and 
regulations  for  their  conduct.  It  seems  that  the  systems 
are  all  very  popular  with  the  people,  but  the  expense  is 
a  heavy  burden  on  the  candidates. 

Acts  were  passed  in  1885  and  1890  aiming  at  the  im- 
provement of  the  nominating  institutions  of  the  State. 
The  act  of  1885  imposed  general  election  qualifications 
for  participation  in  primary  elections,  while  the  one  of 
1890  regulated  the  use  of  proxies  at  conventions.  A  fur- 
ther step  was  taken  in  1809,^  when  a  primary  election 
law  was  passed  which  applies  to  all  counties  ranging  in 
population  from  100,000  to  110,000.  It  "regulates  the 
holding  of  all  primary  elections,"  which  apparently  in- 
cludes direct,  as  well  as  indirect,  primaries.  The  law  ex- 
tends the  general  election  laws,  as  then  applicable  to  the 
elections  held  in  counties  numbering  90,000  inhabitants, 

'  Session  Laws  of  Tennessee,  1899,  p.  963. 


In  Tennessee.  161 

to  all  primaries,  and  provides  that  in  all  cities  tlie  pri- 
mary officers  shall  be  appointed  by  the  chairman  of  the 
ward  committee;  that  suitable  ballots  shall  be  provided 
by  the  party  executive  committer  at  least  three  days 
prior  to  the  primary  election ;  that  each  candidate  may 
designate  a  watcher  at  the  polls;  and  that  offenses 
against  these  provisions  shall  be  punishable  by  confine- 
ment in  the  penitentiary  for  a  term  ranging  from  one  to 
three  years. 

During  the  past  year  there  was  considerable  agitation 
for  a  direct  primary  law.  A  number  of  bills  have  been 
framed,  and  there  were  hopes  of  having  one  introduced 
before  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature.    Whether  this 

was  done  was  not  ascertained.  Tennessee  is  still  laborinar 

o 

under  the  handicap  of  what  is  called  the  "Dort<?h  Elec- 
tion Law"  which  is  declared  to  be  "a  bastard  imitation 
of  the  Australian  election  law,  and  while  it  has  some 
features  of  merit,  is  a  partisan  measure."  ^  Under  the 
law,  the  voter  is  given  five  minutes  to  vote.  If  he  fails  to 
prepare  and  east  his  ballot  within  that  time,  he  is  ejected. 
This  practically  disfranchises  many  more  or  less  ignor- 
ant voters  to  whom  the  law  forbids  the  receiving  of  as- 
sistance, as  well  as  those  who  through  one  mishap  or 
another  failed  to  cast  their  ballot  within  the  time  pre- 
scribed. With  direct  primaries  yielding  generally  sat- 
isfactory results,  and  a  growing  enthusiasm  for  the  di- 
rect vote  in  the  ranks  of  the  Republican  party  of  Tennes- 
see, the  early  enactment  of  a  direct  primary  law  may  be 
looked  for  in  that  State. 


>  Correspondence. 
11 


1G2  Direct  Primary  Legislation, 

West  Yikginia. 

The  only  primary  legislation  on  record  in  West  Vir- 
ginia was  enacted  in  1891,^  and  aims  at  the  protection 
of  direct  and  indirect  primaries  in  a  most  rudimentary 
manner.  The  act  is  optional,  and  merely  recognizes  pri- 
mary elections  in  that  it  requires  "all  caucuses,  primary 
elections,  or  public  meetings  of  any  party,  for  the  nomi- 
nation of  candidates  to  be  supported  at  any  state,  munic- 
ipal, county,  district,  or  ward  election,  or  for  the  selec- 
tion of  delegates  to  any  political  convention,  or  for  the 
appointment  of  any  political  committee,"  to  be  called  by 
a  written  or  printed  notice,  specifying  that  the  same  is 
to  be  held  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  act. 
The  power  of  appointing  primary  election  officers  and  of 
prescribing  all  other  regulations  not  provided  for  in  the 
act,  is  reserved  to  the  political  party  holding  the  primary 
election.  Hence,  beyond  the  imposition  of  certain  pen- 
alties for  corrupt  practices,  and  a  few  general  rules  gov- 
erning balloting,  this  act  leaves  the  vital  control  of  the 
primaries  in  the  hands  of  the  political  parties,  although 
the  general  election  laws  are  in  force  as  far  as  appli- 
cable. 

No  direct  primaries  have  as  yet  been  held  in  West 
Virginia  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for 
state  offices,  but  a  majority  of  counties  of  the  State 
adopted  that  mode  of  electing  representatives  on  their 
tickets.^  In  this  State,  as  in  all  the  neighboring  States, 
the  ferment  of  corrupt  politics  is  slowly  working  the 
masses  of  the  people  into  a  consciousness  of  the  political 
situation,  and  is  crystallizing  public  opinion  in  favor  of 
legislation  which  will  restore  to  the  people  their  proper 
influence  in  government. 

'  Session  Laws  of  West  Virginia,  1891,  p.  175. 

•  Correspondence  M.  O.  Dav/son.  Secretary  of  State  of  West  Virginia. 


CHAPTER  VL 

DIRECT  PRIMARIES  WHICH  ARE  REGULATED 
LARGELY  BY  STATUTE. 

Indiana. 

Indiana  placed  its  first  direct  primary  law  upon  the 
statute  books  of  the  State  this  year  (1901).  The  direct 
vote  system  has  however  been  in  operation  for  a  consider- 
able time  in  some  twelve  counties  under  the  regulation 
of  the  parties,  and  was  even  in  its  extra-legal  form,  quite 
successful.  Among  the  counties  in  which  it  has  been 
tried  by  one  party  or  another — chiefly  by  the  Republican 
party — are:  Henry,  Randolph,  Clark,  Wayne,  Hen- 
dricks, Fayette,  Franklin,  Delaware,  and  Grant  The 
rules  under  which  direct  nominations  took  place  were 
very  few  and  simple.  Since  the  new  law  applies  only  to 
Marion  and  Vanderburgh  counties,  these  old  party  rules 
are  still  in  force  in  the  other  counties.  A  typical  illustra- 
tion of  these  regulations  may  be  found  in  those  govern- 
ing the  Republican  primaries  of  Randolph  county : 

Rule  1.  The  polls  are  to  be  open  from  seven  o'clock 
in  the  morning  to  six  o'clock  in  the  afternoon. 

Rule  2.  The  election  board  is  to  consist  of  one  in- 
spector, one  judge,  one  sheriff,  and  two  poll  clerks,  in 
each  voting  precinct. 

Rule  3.  In  each  township  the  members  of  the  election 
board  are  appointed  by  the  central  committee  of  the  pre- 
cincts, unless  this  committee  chooses  to  act  for  itself. 


164  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

Rule  4.  All  known  Republican  voters,  and  all  per- 
sons wlio  supported  the  Republican  national  ticket  in 
1896,  or  in  1900,  and  wlio  shall  declare  their  allegiance 
to  the  Republican  party,  and  all  minors  who  are  resi- 
dents in  the  county,  and  who  will  be  voters  at  the  next 
general  election,  and  who  declare  themselves  to  be  Re- 
publicans, will  be  entitled  to  vote  at  these  primaries,  and 
at  no  others.     No  proxies  are  to  be  allowed. 

Rule  5.  Tickets  are  to  be  of  plain  white  paper,  uni- 
form in  size  and  appearance. 

Rule  6.  Each  candidate  desiring  his  name  printed  on 
the  ticket,  shall  notify  the  secretary  of  the  county  com- 
mittee of  such  desire,  at  least  ten  days  before  the  date  of 
the  said  primary. 

Rule  Y.  For  the  purpose  of  liquidating  the  expense, 
the  county  committee  assesses  and  collects  from  each  can- 
didate a  reasonable  and  equitable  amount,  and  the  name 
of  no  candidate  who  fails  to  pay  the  sum  for  which  he 
is  assessed  is  placed  upon  the  ballot. 

Rule  8.  The  five  members  of  the  county  committee, 
together  with  the  chairman  and  secretary,  shall  consti- 
tute a  canvassing  board  for  the  purpose  of  making  the 
returns.    The  place  and  time  of  meeting  are  specified. 

Rule  9.   A  plurality  vote  is  sufficient  for  election. 

Rule  10.  The  returns  may  be  challenged  within  five 
days  after  their  publication. 

Rule  11.  The  chairman,  secretary,  and  treasurer  of 
the  county  committee  constitute  the  board  of  election 
commissioners  whose  duty  it  is  to  provide  and  furnish 
the  several  election  boards  with  ballot  boxes,  booths, 
tickets,  poll  books,  tally  sheets,  and  all  stationery  and  ap- 
pliances that  may  be  necessary  to  carry  on  the  election. 


Ill  Indiana.  165 

Eule  12.  Vacancies  on  the  ticket  are  filled  bj  the 
central  committee,  or  by  some  method  which  it  mav  pro- 
vide. 

Even  under  such  simple  provisions  the  direct  vote 
plan  won  great  favor  in  Indiana,  and  for  some  time  there 
has  been  considerable  agitation  in  favor  of  a  law.  Many 
difficulties  were  encountered  in  coming  to  an  agreement 
as  to  a  proper  measure.  The  idea  was  to  have  a  law 
which  was  compulsory  on  all  parties,  for  direct  primaries 
held  at  their  own  expense.  Such  a  law  would  necessarily 
work  a  hardship  on  a  weak  party  by  burdening  it  with  an 
extra  expense.  This  obstacle  was  overcome  in  the  law  of 
1901  by  introducing  the  mandatory  feature  for  all  pri- 
maries and  conventions,  but  allowing  the  party  commit- 
tee to  decide  w^hether  candidates  are  to  be  nominated  by 
direct  vote,  or  by  convention.  In  this  way  minority  par- 
ties are  left  free  to  continue  their  convention  system, 
subject  only  to  the  provisions  of  the  law  applying  to  the 
election  of  delegates. 

The  law  as  finally  passed  applies  to  the  Republican 
and  Democratic  parties  in  Marion  and  Vanderburgh 
■counties  for  all  their  primaries  and  conventions.  At 
least  twelve  wrecks  before  any  election,  the  chaiiTaan  of 
the  party  committee  must  give  a  three  days'  notice  of  a 
primary  election  for  the  selection  of  precinct  committee- 
men, at  which  the  polls  are  to  be  open  from  four  o'clock 
to  eight  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  chairman  also 
appoints  an  election  board  in  each  precinct  which  serves 
imder  oath. 

Only  those  persons  who  at  the  last  election  supported 
the  party  candidates  and  affiliated  with  the  party  hold- 
ing the  primary,  are  entitled  to  vote,  with  the  exception 


166  Direct  Primar'y  Legislation. 

that  a  minor  come  of  age  may  participate.  But  upon 
challenge  he  must  make  an  affidavit  that  he  is  a  quali- 
fied voter  and  intends  to  affiliate  with  the  party  holding 
the  primary.  Any  other  voter  when  challenged  must 
make  a  similar  affidavit,  and  in  addition  swear  that  he 
voted  the  ticket  of  the  party  at  the  last  general  election. 
This  provision  tends  to  discourage  freedom  within  party 
ranks,  and  disfranchises  those  who  have  changed  their 
party  affiliations ;  those  who  for  one  reason  or  other  did 
not  vote  at  all ;  and  those  who  were  naturalized  since  the 
last  election.^ 

Within  ten  days  after  the  election  of  the  precinct 
committmen  the  outgoing  chairman  must  call  them  to- 
gether. They  must  then  organize  by  electing  a  chair- 
man, vice  chairman,  secretary,  and  treasurer,  and  after 
having  perfected  an  organization,  must  decide  whether 
the  party  candidates  are  to  be  nominated  by  direct  vote 
or  by  delegate  convention.  The  new  chairman  imme- 
diately appoints  a  board  of  primary  election  commis- 
sioners, consisting  of  one  freehold  voter  of  the  party 
from  each  ward  or  township,  and  the  four  officers  of  the 
new  committee.  These  commissioners  act  under  oath, 
and  have  charge  of  all  primaries;  decide  all  contests; 
prepare  the  ballots  in  case  of  direct  nominations;  and 
fix  the  number  of  delegates  in  conventions. 

If  the  direct  vote  system  is  adopted,  the  chairman  is- 
sues a  call  for  direct  primaries  at  least  three  weeks  be- 
fore the  day  fixed  therefor.  These  primaries  are  con- 
ducted as  those  for  the  election  of  precinct  committee- 
men, except  that  the  primary  election  board  is  to  con- 
sist of  one  inspector,  two  judges,  and  two  clerks;  the 

•  See  Part  m,  ch.  DL 


In  Indiana.  167 

polls  open  at  eleven  o'clock  in  the  morning  instead  of  at 
f onr  o'clock  in  the  afternoon ;  and  two  watchers  are  ap- 
pointed in  each  precinct  to  witness  the  count.  After  the 
closing  of  the  polls  the  ballots  are  placed  in  bags  and 
sealed,  and  may  not  be  touched  except  by  designated  of- 
ficials. The  qualifications  of  voters  and  the  method  of 
challenging  are  the  same  as  provided  for  in  case  of  the 
election  of  committeemen.  All  eligible  persons  desir- 
ing to  be  candidates  must,  ten  days  before  the  primary, 
file  a  written  notice  with  the  chairman,  or  five  voters 
may  petition  any  eligible  person  upon  the  ticket.  The 
chairman  then  turns  the  notices  of  candidacy  and  the 
petitions  received  over  to  the  board  of  primary  election 
commissioners,  who  group  the  names  under  the  proper 
offices  and  place  each  group  on  the  ballot  in  the  order  in 
which  the  notices  were  filed. 

The  marking  and  counting  of  the  ballots  is  controlled 
by  the  general  election  laws.  The  tabulation  of  returns 
must  be  begun  at  least  twenty-four  hours  aft-er  the  re- 
ceipt of  the  certificates  of  results  from  the  different  pre- 
cincts. Should  the  party  committee  decide  to  hold  con- 
ventions, then  the  call  for  primaries  to  elect  delegates 
must  be  issued  at  least  two  weeks  before  the  date  of  the 
convention.  The  number  of  delegates  is  fixed  by  the 
board  of  primary  election  commissioners.  Any  quali- 
fied person  may  be  voted  for  as  delegate.  The  conven- 
tion must  occur  -^ithin  one  day  after  the  election  of  the 
delegates.  All  delegates  must  be  elected  at  such  pri- 
maries. The  rules  regulating  direct  primaries  are  in 
force,  and  the  polls  are  to  be  open  from  four  o'clock  to 

eight  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.     The  expense  is  paid  out 

# 


168  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

of  party  funds.  It  was  estimated  that  the  expense  would 
not  be  more  than  it  had  been,  and  hence  might  "well  be 
met  by  the  parties  just  as  before.  ITo  person  is  allowed 
on  the  primary  election  board  unless  he  is  a  qualified 
voter  of  the  precinct,  and  a  resident  freeholder  and 
householder  for  one  year,  or  a  householder  for  two  years. 
Nor  is  any  person  eligible  who  has  entered  into  a  wager 
on  the  result  of  the  primary,  or  who  is  a  candidate,  or  a 
close  relative  of  one.  The  law  punishes  illegal  voting, 
false  affidavits,  malfeasance  of  officers,  sale  of  votes,  etc., 
and  requires  an  itemized  statement  of  a  candidate's  ex- 
pense. The  adoption  of  the  law  by  any  party  in  other 
counties  is  possible  by  majority  vote  of  the  precinct  com- 
mitteemen, and  the  filing  of  a  statement  of  such  de- 
termination in  the  circuit  court. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  law  is  largely  an  incorporation 
and  enlargement  of  the  party  primary  rules  which  had 
already  been  found  fairly  satisfactory.  It  is  brief  and 
simple,  but  every  provision  is  to  the  point.  The  provis- 
ion for  a  special  primary  at  which  precinct  committee- 
men are  chosen  who  are  to  decide  upon  the  adoption  of 
the  direct  vote  system,  is  a  novel  feature.  It,  however, 
increases  the  duties  of  the  voter  and  adds  to  the  expense 
of  the  party.  Under  a  compulsory  law  party  officers 
might  be  chosen  simultaneously  with  the  candidates. 
The  question  of  expense  ought  not  to  stand  in  the  way 
of  a  compulsory  law,  for  it  is  but  fair  and  just  to  all  par- 
ties to  give  them  the  advantage  of  a  good  system  oper- 
ated at  the  public  expense.  This  proposition  can  be  de- 
fended on  the  same  principles  as  was  the  institution  of 
the  Australian  ballot  system  at  public  expense. 


In  Kentucky,  169 

Kentucky. 

Kentucky  is  one  of  the  leading  States  that  have  be- 
come vrell  knoAvn  for  their  systems  of  direct  nomination. 
The  first  step  in  this  direction  was  taken  in  1880,  when 
an  imperfect  law  was  passed  which  provided  for  optional 
primaries,  and  applied  to  the  coimties  of  Harrison, 
Bourbon,  Campbell,  and  Kenton.^  The  statute  pre- 
scribed few  positive  regulations  for  the  conduct  of  the 
primaries,  but  delegated  that  power  to  the  political  par- 
ties. The  party  committee  was  to  decide  by  a  majority 
vote  upon  the  holding  of  primaries.  It  determined  the 
time,  place,  and  manner  of  holding  the  primaries,  ap- 
pointed the  officers,  and  prescribed  the  qualifications  for 
voting  supplementary  to  the  general  election  require- 
ments. All  of  these  facts  were  to  be  set  forth  in  the  call 
for  a  primary.  The  primary  election  officers  were  to  act 
under  oath,  and  were  to  be  penalized  for  refusing  legal 
votes,  or  accepting  illegal  votes.  The  poll  books  were  to 
be  preserved  for  two  years,  and  penalties  were  imposed 
for  false  certifications,  alterations,  erasures,  changes, 
and  defacements  of  ballots,  and  for  the  use  of  undue  in- 
fluence in  voting,  or  for  participation  in  bets  or  wagers. 
The  weakness  of  this  law  lay  in  the  fact  that  it  left  the 
direct  primary  almost  entirely  an  extra-legal  institu- 
tion, subject  to  the  prejudices  and  passions  of  party 
men,  and  dependent  in  its  conduct  upon  the  wishes  of 
a  party  committee  which  might  be  governed  in  its  action 
by  private  interests  and  personal  ambitions. 

The  present  system  is,  however,  a  great  improvement 
upon  the  original  one.    The  law  upon  which  it  is  based 

»  Session  Laws  of  Kentucky,  1880,  p.  409, 


170  Direct  Prvniary  Legislation. 

"v\'as  passed  In  1892.*  It  is  incomplete  and  resembles  the 
southern  laws  in  that  it  is  optional  and  authorizes  the 
political  parties  to  prescribe  many  of  the  important 
rules  for  the  conduct  of  the  primary  elections.  When- 
ever the  committee  or  governing  authority  of  the  polit- 
ical party  desires  to  hold  a  primary  election  under  the 
provisions  of  this  act,  it  must  give  forty  days'  notice, 
and  must  designate  the  time,  place,  and  oflSces  for  ■which 
nominations  are  to  be  made.  All  legal  voters  eligible  to 
vote  under  the  general  election  lava's  may  participate  in 
the  primary,  subject  to  such  additional  qualiiications  as 
the  party  executive  committee  may  prescribe.  A  decla- 
ration of  party  affiliation  is  required.  The  registration 
laws  of  Kentucky  do  not  apply  to  the  entire  State,  but 
where  registration  is  required,  a  separate  column  headed 
"Party  Affiliation"  is  set  off  in  the  registration  books, 
and  every  voter  presenting  himself  for  registration  is 
asked  the  question :  "What  political  party  do  you  desire 
to  affiliate  with  V  If  he  refuses  to  answer,  he  may  not 
vote  at  the  primary  election.  Where  registration  is  not 
required,  the  party  may  prescribe  all  conditions  and 
qualifications  for  voting.  This  feature  of  party  enroll- 
ment or  registration  of  party  affiliation  is  regarded  as 
one  of  the  most  successful  provisions  of  the  Kentucky 
law,  and  while  severe  adverse  criticisms  have  been 
passed  regarding  the  Kentucky  direct  primaries,  this 
one  provision  has  generally  commended  itself  very  fa- 
vorably. However,  some  authorities  believe  that  this  re- 
quirement of  the  law  would  not  work  in  many  other 
States,  such  as  New  York  and  Massachusetts,  where 
citizens  would  not  want  to  be  quizzed  publicly  as  to  their 

'  Session  Laws  of  Kentucky,  1892,  p.  106. 


In  Kentucky,  171 

party  affiliations  two  or  three  days  before  tliey  voted.* 
The  primary  election  officers  are  to  be  appointed  by  the 
governing  authority  of  the  party  from  lists  submitted  by 
the  different  candidates  among  whom  they  sliall  be  di- 
vided as  equally  as  possible.  The  name  of  any  candidate 
may  be  placed  upon  the  ballot  by  giving  fifteen  days'  no- 
tice to  the  party  committee,  and  upon  complying  with 
the  conditions  prescribed  by  the  committee.  Voters  are 
allowed  to  cast  their  ballots  for  candidates  whose  names 
do  not  appear  on  the  ballot.  The  expense  is  borne  by 
the  party,  which  prints  all  the  ballots,  subject  to  the 
regulations  of  the  general  election  laws. 

It  will  be  seen  that  some  of  the  most  vital  features  of 
the  system  are  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  party  com- 
mittee. Here  lies  the  weakness  of  the  Kentucky  plan. 
It  permits  the  sacrifice  of  justice,  through  personal  and 
partisan  prejudices  and  preferences.  The  committee  is 
allowed  to  fix  the  date  of  the  primary ;  to  prescribe  rules 
for  the  participation  of  voters  in  primaries  outside  of 
cities  and  tO'^ms  where  registration  laws  do  not  apply; 
to  prescribe  the  form  of  a  test,  and  any  other  qualifica- 
tions for  participation  in  cities  and  towns;  to  appoint 
primary  election  officers  from  lists  submitted  by  the 
candidates;  to  make  rules  for  the  submission  of  the 
names  of  candidates ;  and  to  assess  candidates  for  the  de- 
frayal of  the  expense  incurred  by  the  primaries. 

Numerous  difficulties  have  arisen  because  of  these 
extra-legal  party  powers,  but  it  must  b©  said  in  favor  of 
the  Kentucky  system,  that,  in  spite  of  all  objections,  the 

'  Report  of  National  Primary  Election  League  Conference  of  New  York,  1898, 
p.  118.  Moreover,  in  Massachusetts  registration  io  required  only  once  in  ten 
years.    In  New  York  secret  enrollment  is  provided  for.    See  p.  112. 


172  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

direct  primary  Las  -undoubtedly  proven  itself  an  excel- 
lent means  for  ascertaining  the  real  preferences  of  the 
party,  and  for  enabling  candidat-es  to  make  a  fair  race 
and  to  win  when  worthy  of  success.  The  following 
changes  may  be  suggested  for  the  improvement  of  the 
Kentucky  law.^  It  ought  to  apply  to  congressional  elec- 
tions. The  time  for  holding  the  primary,  which  can  at 
present  be  fixed  by  the  committee  on  partisan  grounds, 
ought  to  be  determined  by  law,  and  ought  to  be  set  at 
about  sixty  days  before  a  general  election.  Under  the 
present  system,  if  a  new  registration  has  not  already 
been  made  before  a  primary  election,  the  registration 
lists  of  the  previous  year  govern.  This  permits  persons 
who  have  lost  their  legal  residence,  and  who  cannot  vote 
at  general  elections,  to  vote  at  the  primaries ;  while  per- 
sons who  have  died,  or  who  have  moved  far  away,  may  be 
personated  by  bribe-takers.  The  registration  laws  ought 
to  be  changed  so  as  to  provide  for  registration  about 
sixty  days  before  the  general  election,  so  that  the  pri- 
maries might  be  held  concurrent  with  the  registration, 
thereby  increasing  the  vote  polled,  reducing  the  expense, 
and  avoiding  the  difficulties  just  mentioned.  The  regis- 
tration officers  ought  to  be  appointed  by  the  county  judge 
and  some  other  important  officer  or  prominent  person  of 
opposite  political  faith  than  the  county  judge,  out  of 
the  ranks  of  the  two  main  political  parties.  Instead  of 
having  the  officers  of  the  primary  appointed  by  the  party 

•  In  a  most  able  address  before  the  National  Conference  on  Primary  Reform 
held  in  New  York  in  1898,  Hon.  Edward  J.  McDermott  briefly  explained  the  de- 
fects of  the  Kentucky  system,  and  made  suggestions  for  changes  and  modifica- 
tions. Coming,  as  his  words  do,  from  a  resident  of  that  State,  who  is  highly  in- 
terested in  matters  of  primary  reform,  they  are  worthy  of  thoughtful  consider- 
ation, and  are  summarized  above. 


In  Kentucky.  173 

committee,  they  onglit  to  be  selected  by  lot  from  am.ong 
lists  submitted  by  the  candidates,  and  should  be  com- 
pelled to  serve.  Their  names  ought  to  be  published  about 
a  month  before  the  primary,  so  that  substitutions  for 
unfit  men  might  be  made  by  the  candidates.^ 

Every  important  candidate  ought  to  be  given  the 
right  to  have  an  agent  or  representative  in  each  pre- 
cinct. This  is  urged  as  a  very  essential  change.  The  ob- 
jection that  there  would  be  too  many  persons  around  the 
officers  is  discredited.  It  is  claimed  that  candidates  for 
small  ofiices,  who  are  in  no  fear  of  the  officers  because  of 
friendship  or  identity  of  interest,  and  candidates  who 
have  no  opposition,  or  who  have  no  doubt  of  a  big  ma- 
jority, will  not  take  the  great  labor  and  bear  the  heavy 
expense  incident  to  the  procurement  of  such  an  army 
of  intelligent,  faithful  inspectors,  or  will  place  them 
only  in  corrupt  or  hostile  precincts.  In  Louisville  can- 
didates had  such  a  right  for  five  or  six  years,  and  there 
was  no  crowd  of  watchers  anywhere  at  any  time,  it  ap- 
pears. 

The  expense  of  the  primary  may  at  present  be  divided 
unfairly  between  the  candidates,  or  it  may  be  excessive. 
In  some  cases  leading  candidates  were  assessed  as  high 
as  five  hundred  dollars.  It  ought  to  be  reduced  by  hold- 
ing primaries  on  r^istration  day,  and  by  using  the  vot- 
ing booths,  ballot  boxes,  voting  places,  and  other  general 
election  paraphernalia  at  the  primaries.  This  would  re- 
duce the  assessments  considerably,  in  case  they  should 
be  continued,  although  preferably  the  expense  ought  to 

'  This  plan  might  be  very  successful,  but  a  simple  method  suggests  itself  by 
having  the  general  election  officers  act  under  regular  pay  at  the  concurrent 
primaries  of  all  parties. 


I7i  Direct  Primary  Legislation, 

be  public,  thereby  relieving  tbe  candidate  of  any  pos- 
sible temptation  to  reimburse  himself  by  corrupt  means 
when  in  office,  should  he  be  successful.  The  tendency 
would  be,  in  case  of  assessments,  for  the  expense  sooner 
or  later  to  come  out  of  the  pockets  of  the  tax-payers.  The 
canvass  of  the  votes,  and  the  decision  of  contested  cases, 
ought  to  be  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  party  commit- 
tees, and  made  the  duty  of  the  same  state  and  county  of- 
ficers who  perform  those  services  at  regular  elections, 
and  should  take  place  in  the  presence  of  the  candidates 
or  their  representatives,  or  be  made  entirely  public.  The 
ballots  should  be  printed,  furnished,  and  preserved  as 
in  case  of  general  elections. 

From  the  preceding  it  will  probably  be  plain  that  the 
Kentucky  system  presents  numerous  opportunities  for 
improvement.  Its  provisions  are  such  that  the  principle 
of  direct  nominations  by  no  means  is  given  a  fair  test. 
Yet,  it  must  be  said  to  the  great  credit  of  the  direct  vote 
scheme  of  nomination,  that  "in  spite  of  all  objections  to 
the  present  system,  the  primary  is  undoubtedly  the  best 
means  for  ascertaining  the  real  preferences  of  the  party, 
and  for  enabling  independent  candidates  to  make  a  fair 
race  and  to  win  when  worthy  of  success."  ^  At  no  time 
was  the  fact  probably  better  demonstrated  than  at  the 
Democratic  primaries  held  in  July  of  the  present  year. 
The  results  were  most  gratifying  throughout.  "It  was 
the  fairest  and  most  orderly  primary  ever  held  in  Louis- 
ville." A  large  vote  was  polled.  Those  candidates  who 
were  defeated  accepted  the  result  as  a  fair  and  full  ex- 
pression of  popular  opinion,  and  many  publicly  declared 

'  McDermott,  before  National  Conference  on  Primary  Election  Reform,  New 
York,  1898. 


In  Missouri.  175 

themselves  as  ready  to  support  their  successful  rivals  to 
the  utmost.  The  Democrats  seem  to  feel  that  the  fair 
manner  in  which  the  primary  was  conducted  will,  in  a 
good  measure,  help  their  ticket  at  the  coming  general 
election. 

MiSSOUKI. 

There  has  l>een  considerable  legislation  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  primary  elections  in  Missouri.  Laws  were 
passed  in  1889,  1891,  1893,  1897,  and  1901.  The  first 
act,  passed  in  1889,^  was  very  rudimentary  in  character. 
It  did  little  more  than  legalize  the  method  of  direct  nom- 
ination by  requiring  an  oath  from  all  primary  election 
officers  that  they  would  faithfully  execute  their  duties 
as  laid  down  in  the  rules  of  their  party.  Penalties  were 
imposed  for  disqualified  voting,  for  voting  at  more  than 
one  place,  for  procuring  illegal  votes,  and  for  making 
fraudulent  returns. 

The  act  of  1891  left  less  to  be  regulated  by  the  polit- 
ical party.^  It  was  compulsory  for  all  primary  elections 
held  by  any  political  party  having  polled  at  least  one- 
fourth  of  the  total  vote  cast  at  the  last  preceding  gen- 
eral election,  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates 
or  electing  delegates  in  cities  of  300,000  inhabitants  or 
over.  This  limited  the  operation  of  the  act  to  St.  Louis. 
Proper  notices  of  the  time,  place,  and  manner  of  hold- 
ing the  primary  election  had  to  be  given  by  the  political 
parties,  or  in  case  of  their  failure  to  do  so,  by  the  "re- 
corder of  voters"  at  least  one  week  prior  to  the  holding 
of  the  primary  election.  An  opportunity  was  given  for 

'  Session  Laws  of  Missouri,  1889,  p.  Ill 
'  Session  Laws  of  Missouri,  1891,  p.  138. 


176  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

independent  movements  by  allowing  any  number  of 
qualified  voters  of  a  ward  above  twenty,  upon  petition, 
and  upon  the  deposit  of  fifty  dollars,  "to  have  placed 
upon  the  ballot  a  delegation  selected  by  them."  The  pri- 
mary election  officers  were  selected  by  the  "recorder  of 
voters,"  from  lists  of  five  submitted  by  each  delegation, 
and  received  five  dollars  for  their  services.  As  in  the 
southern  States,  the  expense  of  the  primary  was  met  by 
an  assessment  of  the  candidates,  but  instead  of  leaving 
the  amount  of  each  individual  assessment  to  be  deter- 
mined by  the  party,  as  is  the  case  in  the  South,  a  definite 
sum  of  ten  dollars  was  required  from  each  candidate.  In 
case  a  surplus  remained  it  was  to  be  turned  into  the 
treasury  of  the  school  board.  The  polls  were  to  be  open 
from  one  o'clock  to  eight  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  All 
other  regulations  were  prescribed  by  the  party. 

The  act  of  1893  was  amendatory  in  character  and  ex- 
tended the  notice  of  the  primary  election  from  one  week 
to  ten  days.^  It  also  required  the  primary  elections  to 
be  held  at  least  thirty-five,  instead  of  thirty  days,  be- 
fore the  general  election.  The  salary  of  the  primary 
election  officers  was  reduced  from  five  dollars  to  three 
dollars.  The  most  important  clause  of  this  act  was  the 
one  which  provided  that  the  act  of  1891  was  to  apply  to 
all  cities  of  100,000  inhabitants  and  over,  instead  of 
300,000  and  over.  In  1897  another  amendment  ^  was 
passed  repealing  the  preceding  acts  as  far  as  they  ap- 
plied to  cities  of  300,000  and  over,  and  substituting  new 
regulations  for  the  conduct  of  primaries  in  cities  of  that 
size.    It  provided  for  the  holding  of  tlie  primary  under 

'  Session  Laws  of  Missouri,  1893,  p.  165. 
*  Session  Laws  of  Mi:ssouri,  1897,  p.  117. 


In  Missouri.  177 

regular  election  macliinery,  with  regular  judges  and 
clerks,  and  with  the  safeguards  of  the  regular  election 
law.  Another  important  change  from  the  act  of  1891 
was  the  requirement  of  a  declaration  of  party  alnliation. 
This,  it  was  claimed,  was  necessary  to  preserve  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  parties,  and  to  prevent  the  fraudulent  par- 
ticipation of  voters  of  opposite  parties  for  the  nomina- 
tion of  weak  candidates  in  each  other's  ranks.  Candi- 
dates were  given  the  right  to  appoint  watchers  at  the 
polls.  The  expense  was  to  be  met  as  under  the  act  of 
1891,  except  that  in  presenting  a  new  delegation  by  pe- 
tition, ten  dollars  were  to  be  paid  for  each  district  repre- 
sented, instead  of  a  lump  sum  of  fifty  dollars.  In  case 
of  a  surplus,  this  was  to  be  refunded  to  the  individuals 
who  had  deposited  the  same,  or  to  their  legal  representa- 
tives. Because  of  the  provision  that  the  expense  was  to 
be  met  by  the  political  parties,  the  Missouri  law  was 
practically  inoperative,  though  nominally  compulsory, 
for  there  is  no  way  of  compelling  a  political  party  to  put 
up  the  requisite  sum  of  money,  and  "machines"  are  not 
particularly  fond  of  contributing  funds  to  a  reform 
movement  which  would  perhaps  accomplish  their  over- 
throw. '■■'•" 'tj/i 

A  solution  of  this  difficulty  seems  to  have  been 
achieved  by  the  Missouri  legislature,  during  its  last 
session  when  it  passed  two  primary  election  laws  and 
amended  the  registration  laws.  One  primary  election 
law  applies  to  cities  of  300,000  inhabitants  and  over.^ 
It  is  compulsory  on  all  parties  which  cast  at  least  10,000 
votes  for  governor  or  supreme  judge  at  the  last  election, 

>  Session  Laws  of  Missouri,  1901,  p.  149. 

12 


178  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

but  makes  the  adoption  of  the  direct  vote  system  of  nom.- 
ination  optional  with  the  parties.  It  concerns  itself 
with  four  general  subjects,  and  resembles  in  this  respect 
the  New  York  law  of  1899  :  Registration ;  the  conduct  of 
primary  elections ;  the  conduct  of  conventions ;  and  the 
selection  of  party  committeemen. 

Registration  is  required  for  participation  in  the  pri- 
mary, in  addition  to  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation 
upon  challenge,  but  no  primary  election  may  be  held  on 
any  registration  day  or  within  five  days  before  or  after. 
The  primary  elections  of  the  different  parties  occur  on 
different  days  which  are  determined  by  the  party  com- 
mittees. The  polls  are  to  be  open  from  one  o'clock  to 
eight  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  All  polling  places  are 
provided  at  the  public  expense,  while  the  salaries  of 
judges  and  clerks  are  paid  out  of  fees  of  twenty  dollars 
required  in  case  of  the  filing  of  lists  of  delegates,  or 
by  assessment  in  case  of  direct  nomination.  Each  "dele- 
gation" or  set  of  delegates  when  filed  must  be  endorsed 
by  at  least  twenty  qualified  elexitors,  and  may  be  ac- 
companied by  a  list  of  six  names  of  qualified  electors 
within  a  district.  From  all  lists  thus  submitted  the 
primary  election  officers  are  to  be  chosen.         ** 

If  the  party  committee  decides  to  nominate  public 
officers  by  direct  vote,  then  the  candidates  are  required 
to  file  petitions  signed  by  one  hundred  names  in  case 
of  city  offices,  and  by  twenty-five  names  for  districts  in 
the  city.  The  expense  of  polling  places  is  met  by  the 
party,  as  in  case  of  primaries  for  the  election  of  dele- 
gates, but  the  salaries  of  the  primary  election  officers 
must  be  paid  by  the  candidates  through  assessments  by 
the  party  committee.     The  primary  election  officers  are 


In  Missouri.  179 

selected  bj  the  election  commissioners  from  lists  sub- 
mitted by  the  party  committeemen.  Yoters,if  challenged, 
must  make  affidavit  respecting  their  name,  residence, 
and  party.  Watchers  are  appointed  by  the  party  au- 
thorities. 

Provision  is  made  for  the  maintenance  of  a  popular 
party  organization  through  the  compulsory  biennial  elec- 
tion of  committeemen  at  the  primaries.  Special  pri- 
maries may  be  called  by  the  parties  at  their  own  ex- 
pense prior  to  the  first  official  primaries  for  the  selection 
of  party  officers.  In  this  respect  the  Missouri  law  re- 
sembles that  of  Indiana  which  was  passed  last  year.  An 
excellent  opportunity  is  afforded  by  this  provision  for  the 
adoption  of  the  direct  vote  system  through  the  instruc- 
tion of  the  newly-chosen  party  committeemen.  Where 
conventions  are  held,  their  conduct  is  regulated  in  some 
detail  by  the  law,  while  penalties  are  imposed  for  cor- 
rupt practices.  The  other  primary  election  law  passed 
during  the  year  1901  applies  to  cities  of  175,000,  and 
less  than  300,000  inhabitants.^  It  is  compulsory  and 
merely  regulates  party  action  in  the  selection  of  dele- 
gates to  conventions.  Through  an  amendment  of  the 
registration  laws,  registration  is  introduced  into  cities 
of  100,000  and  less  than  300,000  inhabitants.^ 

>  Session  Laws  of  Missouri,  1901,  p.  165. 

•  Session  Laws  of  Missouri,  1901,  p.  170.  An  amendment  was  also  passed  em- 
powering the  city  to  pay  the  salaries  for  judges  and  clerks  of  elections,  and 
members  of  registration  boards  for  the  preceding  year,  which  had  remained  un- 
paid. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

IMPERFECT    DIRECT    PRIMARY    LAWS    AND    PARTY 
SYSTEMS   WEST    OF  THE   MISSISSIPPI. 

North  Dakota. 

No  primary  election  law  has  as  yet  been  enacted  in 
North  Dakota,  although  a  vigorous  but  vain  attempt 
was  made  in  this  direction  at  the  last  session  of  the  leg- 
islature. The  sentiment  in  favor  of  a  good  law  is  strong, 
but  here,  as  in  so  many  other  States,  "machine"  opposi- 
tion has  defeated  all  efforts  to  enact  such  a  law.  The 
original  North  Dakota  bill  bore  a  close  resemblance  to 
the  Wisconsin  bill.  It  included  nominations  for  mem- 
bers of  congress,  state  officers,  county  and  city  officers, 
presidential  electors,  judges  of  the  supreme  and  district 
courts,  and  members  of  the  legislative  assembly.^  "Ma- 
chine" opposition,  however,  first  forced  a  compromise 
measure,  and  then  "killed"  the  compromise. 

'  As  returned  from  the  committee  rooms  and  presented  to  the  legislature  the 
bill  was  compulsory,  and  provided  for  primary  elections  in  each  coimty  of  the 
State  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  county  oflfices,  and  members  of  the 
legislative  assembly.  Special  regulations  were  to  govern  nominations  in  case  of 
city  and  ward  offices,  provided  the  cities  contained  at  least  2,000  inhabitants.  All 
cities  of  a  smaller  size  were  not  to  be  subject  to  the  law.  Nor  were  any  parties 
which  had  cast  less  than  5  per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  for  governor  at  the  last 
preceding  election,  to  be  governed  by  the  act.  Candidates  were  to  file  nomina- 
tion papers  containing  a  number  of  signatures  of  qualLfied  electors  proportion- 
ate to  the  importance  of  the  office.  The  expense  was  to  be  met  by  an  assessment 
of  each  candidate  to  the  extent  of  2  1-2  per  cent,  of  his  salary,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  county  constables,  and  justices  of  the  peace,  who  were  to  pay  the  nomi- 
nal sum  of  one  dollar.  The  promulgation  of  the  party  platform  was  left  to  the 
state  central  committee  as  in  case  of  the  amended  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin. 


In  South  Dakota.  181 

South  Dakota. 

No  law  has  as  yet  been  enacted  in  Soutli  Dakota  estal> 
lishing  direct  primaries.  However,  the  majority  party 
(Republican)  has  made  use  of  the  direct  nomination 
plan  in  some  of  the  counties  of  the  State,  such  as  Hughes 
and  Hyde.  It  seems  to  have  worked  very  satisfactorily 
for  the  nomination  of  county  officers,  and  according  to 
the  opinions  expressed  by  some  of  the  most  prominent 
members  of  the  party,  there  is  little  objection  to  the 
nomination  of  legislative  officers  as  well.  But  for  choos- 
ing delegates  to  state  and  to  judicial  circuit  conventions, 
many  regard  it  with  disfavor,  because  these  conventions 
are  held  considerably  earlier  than  the  opening  of  the 
local  canvass,  hence  necessitating  the  calling  of  two 
primary  elections  within  a  year. 

The  argument  of  the  domination  of  the  country  vote 
by  the  city  vote  is  also  advanced  in  South  Dakota  against 
the  proposition  of  continuing  under  the  present  plan  of 
including  the  direct  choice  of  delegates  for  state  and  ju- 
dicial circuit  conventions.  It  is  held  that  "two  or  three 
large  precincts  can  club  together,  select  delegates  to  suit, 
and  elect  them,  while  the  rural  precincts  cannot  got 
together  as  well  on  this  proposition,  and  generally,  let 
the  one  ticket  go  through  by  default."  This  is  the  way 
a  prominent  politician  puts  it.  But  he  adds  that  in  spite 
of  these  objectionable  features,  sufficient  support  cannot 
be  found  for  the  abolition  of  the  system.  At  three  succes- 
sive biennial  canvasses  a  vote  was  taken  and  resulted 
largely  against  a  change.  The  fact  that  under  the  direct 
nomination  plan  the  opportunities  for  corruption  are 
greatly  reduced  because  of  the  necessity  of  buying  up  a 


182  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

I 
large  niimbor  of  voters,  seems  to  have  been  clearly  dem- 
onstrated in  South  Dakota,  and  has  frequently  been  the 
subject  of  favorable  commendation  by  the  local  press. 
It  is  generally  conceded  that  the  plan  resulted  in  the 
nomination  of  better  men.  But  this  is  claimed  to  have 
been  partly  offset  by  the  "bunching  of  candidates"  in 
certain  localities  where  the  population  centered,  and 
where  many  of  the  most  popular  men  resided.  It  may 
be  said  that  the  experience  with  direct  primaries  in 
South  Dakota,  while  it  did  not  prove  an  unqualified  suc- 
cess, nevertheless  sufficiently  demonstrated  the  strong 
points  of  the  system  to  win  many  active  supporters  who 
at  present  are  agitating  in  favor  of  a  general  law  ex- 
tending the  system  throughout  the  State.  Such  an  at- 
tempt was  made  several  years  ago,  but  it  failed  because 
of  violent  opposition  from  the  "machine." 

COLOEADO. 

Colorado  has  no  direct  primary  law,  but  It  legalizes 
primary  elections  in  a  statute^  by  which  it  extends  its 
corrupt  practices  act  "to  any  caucus,  convention,  or 
primary  election,  held  for  the  purpose  of  nominating 
public  officers,"  or  to  any  "caucus,  convention,  or  pri- 
mary election  held  for  the  purpose  of  choosing  delegates 
to  any  convention  to  nouiinate,"  etc.  In  several  coun- 
ties of  the  State  direct  nominations  appear  to  have  been 
tried,  but  without  any  legal  regulation  or  authority. 
That  a  growing  sentiment  prevails  in  favor  of  legislation 
on  this  subject,  was  demonstrated  during  the  present 
year,  when  a  bill  was  introduced  aiming  at  the  abolition 
of  the  convention  system  for  the  nomination  of  county 
officers. 

'  Session  Laws  of  Colorado,  1887,  p.  347. 


In  Iowa  —  Kansas.  183 

TowA. 

Iowa  lias  no  direct  primary  law ;  however,  systems  of 
direct  nomination  have  been  in  operation  in  several 
counties  of  the  State  for  many  years.  It  was  not  until 
1898  that  any  legislation  bearing  upon  primary  elections 
was  enacted  in  this  State.^  The  act  of  this  year  is  ex- 
tremely rudimentary.  It  merely  prohibits  illegal  vot- 
ing at  a  "primary  election  for  the  nomination  of  officers 
or  for  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions,"  and 
makes  participation  in  two  primaries  unlawful.  The 
law,  hence,  does  no  more  than  recognize  direct  nomina- 
tions without  in  any  way  interfering  with  their  conduct 
by  the  political  parties. 

Kansas. 

Some  writers  claim  for  Kansas  the  distinction  of  hav- 
ing inaugurated  the  first  direct  vote  system.  The 
present  research  has  not  borne  out  this  contention,  but 
tlie  writer  is  ready  to  say  that  in  Jackson  county,  Kan- 
sas, there  has  been  in  operation  for  nineteen  years,  a 
most  unique  system  of  nomination,  unlike  all  others 
used  in  this  country,  and  most  fruitful  of  success 
throughout  the  entire  period  of  its  long  trial.  This  sys- 
tem, which  is  known  as  the  "representative  vote  system 
of  direct  nomination,"  is  entirely  extra-legal  in  its  oper- 
ation.^ The  primary  election  law  passed  in  1897  does 
not  deal  with  direct  primaries  of  any  kind,  but  merely 

1  Session  Laws  of  Iowa,  1898,  p.  59. 

» It  was  framed  by  John  L.  Hopkins,  a  resident  of  Holton  City  in  Jackson 
county,  and  has  been  in  continuous  operation,  with  one  exception,  since  1877. 
For  a  clear  and  strong  exposition  of  the  plan  supplementary  to  what  is  given 
here,  see  the  originator's  article  in  the  Arena,  June,  1898. 


184  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

legalizes  "primary  assemblages"  for  tlie  nomination  of 
officers,  or  for  the  selection  of  delegates.  It  is  optional, 
and  leaves  the  entire  conduct  of  the  primaries  to  the  po- 
litical parties. 

The  Jackson  coimty  scheme  was  adopted  by  common 
consent  of  all  the  members  of  the  Hepublican  party  for 
the  nomination  of  all  county,  city,  and  township  officers. 
Its  details  are  not  confusing,  and  are  worthy  of  a 
thorough  explanation.  Each  precinct  is  entitled  to  a 
certain  number  of  representative  votes,  proportioned  in 
accordance  with  the  vote  cast  at  the  last  preceding  gen- 
eral election.  If,  for  example,  one  representative  vote 
for  every  ten  votes  cast  is  the  basis  of  apportionment, 
then  a  precinct  having  cast  one  hundred  votes  is  entitled 
to  ten  representative  votes,  and  one  having  cast  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  votes,  is  entitled  to  twelve  representa- 
tive votes.  These  representative  votes  are  divided  among 
the  different  candidates  upon  the  basis  of  their  share  of 
the  total  vote  cast  in  that  precinct  at  the  'primary.  If 
in  a  precinct  entitled  to  eight  representative  votes,  a  full 
vote  of  eighty  is  polled  out  of  which  A  gets  20  votes,  B 
40  votes,  and  C  20  votes,  then  A's  share  of  the  repre- 
sentative vote  is  20-80  of  eight,  or  two  representative 
votes;  B's,  40-80  of  eight,  or  four;  and  C's  20-80  of 
eight,  or  two. 

The  candidate  receiving  the  highest  number  of  repre- 
sentative votes  in  all  the  precincts  receives  the  nomina- 
tion, and  not  the  one  receiving  the  greatest  number  of 
direct  votes,  ahhough,  usually,  the  latter  is  also  true. 
It  is  not  true  in  the  extreme  instance  of  a  village  and  of 
a  country  precinct,  having  representative  votes  of  9  and 
8  respectively.     A  carries  the  village  precinct  by  60 


In  Kansas.  185 

votes  to  B's  30,  giving  them  6  and  3  representative  votes 
respectively.  B  carries  the  country  precinct,  in  which 
for  one  reason  or  another,  only  56  of  its  total  80  votes 
were  polled,  by  a  vote  of  40  to  A's  14,  entitling  him  to  6 
representative  votes  and  A  to  2,  thus  giving  B,  who  re- 
ceived a  total  of  only  72  votes,  the  nomination  over  A 
by  one  representative  vote,  although  A  received  a  total  of 
74  votes. 

This  system  which,  prima  facie,  appears  somewhat 
involved,  is  really  very  simple,  although  computation  in 
decimals  is  necessary  to  get  at  the  result.  Its  success 
was  almost  unqualified,  and  the  interest  taken  in  the 
primaries  is  a  strong  argument  in  its  favor.  At  the 
primary  election  held  July  13,  1895,  the  greatest  num- 
ber of  votes  cast  for  a  candidate  was  1931,  while  at  the 
general  election  which  followed  only  twenty  votes  more 
were  cast.  By  making  the  vote  cast  at  the  last  preced- 
ing general  election  the  basis  for  apportionment,  fraud 
is  prevented,  for  the  results  of  the  election  being  known, 
as  well  as  the  number  of  votes  required  for  one  repre- 
sentative vote,  everybody  can  figure  out  for  himself  the 
number  of  representative  votes  to  which  a  precinct  is  en- 
titled. It  is  in  general,  also,  a  just  method  for  the  coun- 
try, although  it  may  happen  that  bad  weather,  or  the 
bolting  of  the  jDarty  at  the  general  election,  may  result 
in  the  polling  of  a  slight  party  vote,  and  thereby  reduce 
the  number  of  representative  votes  to  which  the  country 
districts  are  entitled  at  the  next  primary  election.  In 
this  way  temporary  dissatisfaction  with  the  party,  or  an 
independent  movement,  may  sadly  reduce  the  local 
strength  of  a  party  when  the  next  nominations  are  made. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  tends  to  encourage  attendance  at 


186  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

tlie  polls  in  rural  districts  on  general  election  day.  It 
protects  the  country  precincts  by  giving  them  the  advan- 
tage of  an  unpolled  vote,  though  experience  has  shown 
that  the  interest  in  the  primary  is  so  general  as  practi- 
cally to  call  out  the  full  general  vote. 

Under  this  system  the  weakest  candidate  all  around 
is  hound  to  fail,  while  the  strongest  candidate  all  around, 
wins.  Local  favoritism  or  prejudice  cannot  seriously 
affect  the  candidates.  From  this  it  follows  that  only 
good,  strong,  and  popular  men  who  see  the  chances  of 
winning,  will  run,  while  "local  candidates,"  and  the 
'^straw  candidates"  put  up  hy  the  "machine"  to  scatter 
votes,  mil  not  he  of  much  use,  and  will  drop  away. 
Hence,  there  will  he  a  tendency  towards  the  reduction  of 
the  number  of  poor  candidates  in  the  field,  and  the  en- 
couragement of  competent  men. 

Party  harmony  is  strengthened,  since  every  candidate 
is  given  full  credit  for  his  share  of  representative  votes 
in  all  the  precincts,  and  if  he  loses,  he  feels  that  the  fight 
was  free-for-all,  fair,  and  square,  and  went  to  the  most 
generally  desired  man,  with  whom  he  is  willing  to  shake  , 
hands,  and  whom  he  is  ready  to  aid  at  the  election. 
^Moreover,  party  factions  are  compelled  to  fight  it  out 
independently  in  their  own  precincts,  thus  reducing  the 
possibility  of  embroiling  the  whole  party.  Partisanship 
and  faith  in  party  candidates  will  be  strengthened,  in 
that  manipulations  by  professional  politicians  are  made 
far  more  difficult  through  the  necessity  of  extending 
their  operations  over  a  wide  area,  and  instituting  sep- 
arate schemes  and  plots  in  the  different  precincts.  The 
people  will  feel  that  the  men  chosen  are  not  the  creatures 
of  a  "machine,"  but  are  "of  their  own  blood."     For 


In  Nebraska.  187 

similar  reasons,  also,  "trading," — that  fruitful  source  of 
perverted  representation,  is  practically  made  impossible. 
Every  candidate  needs  all  the  votes  he  can  get  in  all 
the  precincts  in  order  to  win  out.  Independent  "trades" 
in  each  precinct  will  be  necessary  in  order  to  accomplish 
anything,  and  it  will  be  difficult,  in  the  first  place,  to 
find  the  proper  parties  for  a  "trade,"  and  then  to  "trade" 
in  a  sufficient  number  of  precincts  to  carry  the  nomina- 
tion. 

It  must  not  be  presumed  that  the  advantages  which 
have  been  enumerated  here,  are  peculiar  to  the  Kansas 
plan  alone.  They  manifest  themselves  under  the  plain 
direct  vote  system,  but  the  Kansas  method,  because  of 
its  exceptional  fairness  to  all  districts,  whether  urban 
or  rural,  and  because  of  the  special  incentive  to  a  full, 
;untraded,  uncornipted  vote,  tends  to  emphasize  the 
strong  features  which  are  common  to  direct  primaries. 
The  pronounced  success  of  the  Kansas,  scheme  where 
tested  for  nearly  a  score  of  years,  is  sufficient  to  recom- 
mend it  for  thoughtful  consideration  by  those  who  have 
the  welfare  of  good  government  at  heart.  IsTo  good  rea- 
son seems  to  exist  why  this  plan  should  not  operate  suc- 
cessfully in  many  other  States,  and  the  writer  would  not 
be  at  all  surprised,  if  the  Kansas  representative  vote 
system  of  direct  nomination  should  some  day  find  a  com- 
plete incorporation  in  a  comprehensive  direct  primary 
law. 

Nebraska. 

The  first  law  recognizing  direct  primaries  in  ^N^ebraska 
was  placed  upon  the  statute  books  in  1887.^  It  legal- 
izes primary  elections  for  direct  nomination,   and  re- 

»  Session  Laws  of  Nebraska,  1887,  p.  454. 


188  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

quires  voters  to  swear  tliat  they  have  not  participated  in 
any  other  primary.  Since  the  important  features  of 
this  law  were  re-enacted  in  1899,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
state  them  here.  The  law  of  1899^  is  optional,  and  more 
complete  than  either  the  Tennessee,  Utah,  South  Caro- 
lina, or  Alabama  laws.  Important  positive  rules  restrict 
the  freedom  of  party  regulation,  and  place  the  primary 
elections  largely  upon  a  legal  footing.  In  ITebraska 
nominations  may  be  made  by  convention,  by  committee, 
by  primary  meeting,  by  direct  primary,  or  by  petition. 
The  general  election  laws  are  extended  to  the  direct  and 
indirect  primaries  as  far  as  possibla  Twenty  days' 
notice  of  a  primary  is  required.  All  persons  who  are 
legal  voters  have  the  right  to  participate  in  the  primary 
election,  subject  to  such  additional  qualifications  as  the 
party  authorities  may  prescribe.  In  order  to  prevent 
any  but  those  affiliating  with  and  being  actual  members 
of  any  political  party  from  participating  in  the  primary 
of  the  party,  a  system  of  registration  is  provided,  imder 
which  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation  is  required. 

The  ISTebraska  law  provides  for  three  registration 
days,  the  Thursday  of  the  third,  the  Friday  of  the  sec- 
ond, and  the  Saturday  of  the  first  week  preceding  the 
general  election,  and  if  any  party  desires  to  hold  a  pri- 
mary previous  to  any  of  these  days,  the  registration  for 
the  previous  year  governs.  The  primary  election  of- 
ficers are  selected  from  lists  furnished  by  the  respective 
candidates  to  the  committee,  or  governing  authority,  and 
are  divided  as  equally  as  possible  among  the  various 
candidates.  The  duties  of  these  officers  are  fixed  in  some 
detail  by  law,  and  they  are  made  responsible  through 
an  oath.     The  expense  is  met  by  the  party. 

'  Session  Laws  of  Nebraska,  1899,  p.  134 


In  Arkansas.  189 

Nominations  by  direct  vote  have  been  given  a  valuable 
local  test  in  the  city  of  Lincoln,  where  a  direct  vote  sys- 
tem has  been  used  by  the  Republican  party  for  making 
nominations  to  city  offices  since  1896.  As  a  protection 
against  nomination  by  a  small  minority,  majority  nomi- 
nations are  required,  and  second  primaries  held  if  neces- 
sary. All  "persons  who  are  qualified  voters  and  who  are 
members  of  the  Republican  party,  and  affiliated  with 
such  party,  and  voted  the  Republican  ticket  at  the  last 
general  election,  have  the  right  to  vote  at  the  primaries, 
and  the  voters  challenged  may  vote  upon  their  taking 
the  oath  as  to  their  qualifications,  as  herein  specified." 
This  simple  provision  seems  to  have  operated  quite  suc- 
cessfully in  that  members  of  opposite  political  parties 
did  not  participate  to  any  material  extent  in  each  other's 
primaries.  However,  this  test  appears  to  contain  an 
element  of  unconstitutionality  in  that  it  disfranchises 
the  following  classes  of  voters  from  participating  in  the 
primary :  (1)  Voters  come  of  age  since  the  last  election ; 
(2)  voters  naturalized  during  the  last  year;  (3)  all 
qualified  voters  who  failed  to  cast  a  ballot  at  the  last 
election;  (4)  all  voters  who  changed  their  party  affilia- 
tions since  the  last  election.  Although  the  Lincoln  sys- 
tem operates  under  very  simple  rules,  it  seems  to  have 
been  generally  successful.  "Its  expense  has  been  con- 
siderable to  the  city  and  to  the  candidates,  but  the  people 
are  well  satisfied.  "  ^ 

Arkansas. 

In  Arkansas  the  direct  primary  has  enjoyed  an  ex- 
tended local  application,  most  of  the  counties  of  the 
State  making  this  method  their  regular  means  of  uomi- 

1  Correspondence,  Secretary  of  State  Weesner. 


190  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

nation,  l^o  compulsory  law  has  as  yet  been  enacted 
for  their  regulation.  However,  the  statute  books  of  the 
State  contain  a  law  which  dates  back  to  1895,^  and  is 
in  force  only  when  the  parties  decide  to  hold  their  pri- 
maries subject  to  it.  It  provides  that  whenever  any  po- 
litical party  in  the  State  by  direct  primary  nominates 
any  persons  to  become  candidates,  at  any  general  or 
special  election,  or  before  the  legislature  for  United 
States  senator,  or  for  congress,  or  any  legislative,  judi- 
cial, state,  district,  county,  township,  or  municipal  office, 
such  nomination  shall  be  legal.  In  order  to  enjoy  the 
benefits  of  the  law,  it  is  necessary  for  the  party  com- 
mittee to  file  a  certificate  with  the  county  clerk  at  least 
twenty  days  before  the  primary  election  to  the  effect 
that  the  party  desires  to  adopt  the  law.  As  in  case  of 
all  the  southern  States  the  conduct  of  the  primary  is  left 
largely  to  the  political  parties.  However,  the  judges 
and  clerks  must  have  the  same  qualifications  as  those 
which  are  required  for  general  election  officers;  they 
must  be  of  the  same  party,  and  must  act  under  oath. 
For  participation  in  the  primary  election,  general  elec- 
tion qualifications  are  required  outside  of  those  imposed 
by  the  authority  of  the  party  which  conducts  the  pri- 
mary. 

Utah. 

In  Utah  an  optional  act  was  passed  in  1899  pro- 
viding for  the  holding  of  direct  primaries,  and  for  the 
punishment  of  offenses  committed  at  the  same.^  The 
law  is  an  almost  exact  duplicate  of  the  Nebraska  law 

'  Session  Laws  of  Arkansas.  1895,  p.  240. 
»  Session  Laws  of  Utah,  1899,  p.  lia 


In  Ne'oada.  191 

of  1899,  and  hence  need  not  be  reviewed  here.  Although 
Utah  has  had  this  law  upon  her  statute  books  for  twelve 
years,  no  political  party  ever  availed  itself  of  the  oppor- 
tunity of  holding  direct  primaries.^  However,  there  is 
great  dissatisfaction  with  the  present  state  of  things,  and 
a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  legislature  at  its  last  ses- 
sion looking  towards  the  institution  of  a  complete  and 
effective  svstem  of  direct  nomination.  At  the  recent 
election  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  was  adopted 
in  regard  to  the  referendum,  and  there  will  be  legisla- 
tion along  this  line,  although  some  of  the  legislators  aim 
to  get  around  this  by  adopting  the  direct  vote  plan  of 
nomination.^ 

IN'evada. 

.Direct  primary  legislation  in  Nevada  dates  from 
1883.^  The  act  of  this  year  bears  a  strong  resemblance 
to  the  Louisiana  act  of  1900,  which  appears  to  be  a  copy 
of  it.  It  leaves  the  holding  of  direct  primaries  optional 
with  the  political  parties,  but  requires  that  when  the 
party  committee  makes  a  call,  it  shall  adopt  a  resolution 
setting  forth  the  time  and  place;  the  names  of  the  pri- 
mary officers;  the  object  of  the  election;  and  the  quali- 
fications required  in  addition  to  those  prescribed  by  the 
election  laws  of  the  State.  A  copy  of  this  resolution  is 
to  be  contained  in  the  notice.  The  "primary  election 
board"  must  be  composed  of  legal  voters.  The  duties  of 
this  board  are  defined  at  considerable  length.     Corrupt 

>  Correspondence,  Secretary  of  State,  James  D.  Hammond, 
»  Correspondence,  Paul  C.  Thorn,  Attorney  Gteneral,  Utah. 
•  Session  Laws  of  Nevada,  1883,  p.  28. 


192  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

practices  are  penalized.  All  else  is  left  to  the  political 
parties.  The  Nevada  and  Utah  acts  may  be  set  down  as 
belonging  to  the  southern  type  of  primary  laws  in  that 
they  are  optional,  and  legalize  systems  of  direct  nomina- 
tion, which  through  the  absence  of  important  positive 
legal  provisions  are  to  be  largely  constructed  by  the 
political  parties  that  may  choose  to  adopt  them. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  PRIMARY  ELECTION  OP  DELEGATES  TO  CONVEN- 
TIONS  UNDER   COMPULSORY   LAWS. 

California. 

California  is  noted  for  persistent  efforts  at  primary 
reform.  Probably  more  severe  and  long  drawn  struggles 
for  better  regulated  primaries  have  been  fought  out  in 
this  State  than  in  any  other.  The  contest  has,  however, 
not  been  for  direct  nomination  by  the  voters  at  pri- 
maries, but  for  better  methods  of  electing  delegates  to 
conventions.  Ever  since  the  davs  of  "Boss"  Felton 
there  has  been  constant  thinking,  discussion,  and  agita- 
tion for  an  improvement  of  '^boss-ridden"  primaries  and 
conventions.  Corruption,  in  its  most  aggravating  form, 
early  infested  California  politics.  The  state  government 
was  from  its  origin  in  the  hands  of  politicians  "who 
devoured  the  vitals  of  the  Commonwealth  and  consumed 
the  substance  of  the  people."  ^ 

The  first  primary  election  law  enacted  in  this  State, 
and,  indeed,  the  first  primary  law  of  any  kind  to  be  en- 
acted in  this  country,  was  wrung  from  a  clique  of 
politicians  after  a  desperate  struggle  in  1886.^  It  was 
shortly  before  the  general  election  held  September  6, 
1865,  that  the  "bold  and  unblushing  attempt  to  sell  the 
city  of  San  Erancisco"  was  made  by  Eelton,  the  "boss" 


'  San  Francisco  Bulletin,  September  2,  1865. 

'  For  a  vivid  account,  see  the  San  Francisco  Bulletin  for  August  and  Septem- 
ber, 1865. 

13 


194  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

of  the  Union  party,  who,  "through  his  management 
politically,  and  through  the  courts,  had  fastened  upon 
the  taxpayers  of  San  Francisco  a  debt  of  more  than 
$1,000,000,  pocketing  as  his  fee  more  than  a  quarter  of 
a  million,"  and  then  going  into  the  primaries  and  elec- 
tions, and  "by  the  expenditure  of  this  very  money  pro- 
curing the  election  of  delegates  bound  to  the  nomination 
of  such  persons  to  the  legislature  as  would  assist  in  his 
election  to  the  United  States  Senate."  ^ 

The  attempt  was  so  bold  and  "so  astoundingly  au- 
dacious and  impudent,"  that  opposition  at  once  devel- 
oped in  the  form  of  an  Independent  Union  party  repre- 
senting some  seven  thousand  votes.  Delegates  were 
chosen  and  when  they  met,  Felton's  agents  strove  with 
every  form  of  bribery  that  ingenuity  could  invent,  to 
break  down  the  convention.  They  failed,  though  not 
completely.  During  the  progress  of  the  convention  a 
resolution  was  offered  providing  for  "a  vote  upon  the 
question  of  continuing  or  abolishing  the  primaries."  ^ 
But  the  "machine"  prevented  it  from  being  "reached" 
in  time  to  be  acted  upon.  Though  this  effort  failed,  it 
was  well  prophesied  that  "the  next  legislature  would  in- 
sist upon  nominations  by  the  voice  of  the  people  through 
petition,  or  by  any  other  means." 

Public  sentiment  was  pronounced  in  favor  of  primary 
reform,  and  when  the  legislature  met  in  1866,  though 
the  "machine"  had  succeeded  in  defeating  some  of  the 
most  enthusiastic  reform  candidates,  it  was  felt  that 
something  had  to  be  done.  The  result  was  the  enactment 

1  San  Francisco  Bulletin,  September  4,  1865. 

'  San  Francisco  Weekly  Bulletin,  August  26,  1865. 


Delegate  Convention  in  California.  195 

of  the  first  caucus  or  primary  election  law  in  the  coun- 
try.^ It  was  optional  and  provided  for  the  proper  publi- 
cation of  notices,  giving  the  time,  place,  and  manner  of 
holding  the  primary;  the  authority  which  called  it;  and 
the  qualifications  for  voting.  All  oflScers  were  to  act 
under  oath.  Challenges  were  allowed,  and  penalties  for 
corrupt  practices,  imposed. 

This  meager  legal  setting  but  slightly  checked  the  in- 
creasing corruption  of  the  primaries.  However,  nomina- 
tions continued  to  be  made  under  the  law  for  about  thirty 
years.  In  the  course  of  this  period,  which  marked  a  tre- 
mendous development  of  industry  and  wealth  through- 
out the  State,  "machine"  politics  rapidly  grew  more 
dominant.  Bossism  riveted  itself  more  firmly  upon  the 
party  organization.  The  delegate  convention  system 
became  a  sham  of  democracy.  The  "popular"  primaries 
grew  into  hollow  mockeries  of  republican  government. 
Suffrage  lost  its  power  and  significance,  and  under  the 
skillful  organization  and  corrupt  machinations  of  pro- 
fessional politicians,  tended  to  narrow  itself  down  to 
small  cliques  of  men  in  whose  hands  it  operated  as  a  most 
powerful  means  to  selfish  ends. 

That  a  reaction  should  follow  this  growing  domina- 
tion of  "machine"  politics  is  but  natural.  The  evils  of 
bad  government  grew  so  glaring,  and  the  pernicious 
results  of  continued  mismanagement  by  public  officials 
were  so  widespread  and  unbearable,  that  even  the  most 
indifferent  citizens  could  not  but  waken  to  the  deplorable 
condition  into  which  the  governments  of  the  Common- 
wealth and  of  the  larger  cities,  were  fast  sinking.     Al- 

>  Session  Laws  of  California,  18G0,  p.  483. 


196  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

thongh  many  reformers,  with  increasing  activity,  liad 
been  disseminating  ideas  for  the  improvement  of  the 
nominating  machinery  throughout  the  State  ever  since 
their  first  snccess  in  1866,  politicians,  strengthened  by 
an  indifferent  pnblic  sentiment,  were  able  to  frustrate 
all  efforts  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century. 

Tt  was  not  until  1805  that  further  tangible  results 
were  achieved  in  the  way  of  primary  legislation  in  Cali- 
fornia. This  year  opened  up  a  new  era  of  reform.  The 
condition  of  the  primaries  and  conventions  demanded 
immediate  and  drastic  measures.  But  if  politicians  had 
thwarted  efforts  at  reform  before  1895  the  courts  proved 
themselves  stumbling  blocks  from  then  on.  Constitu- 
tional difficulties  immediately  rose,  and  there  followed 
in  rapid  succession  the  laws  of  1895,^  189Y,^  1899,^  and 
1901.^  Wlien  one  had  been  struck  down  by  the  courts, 
another  followed  at  the  next  session  of  the  legislature, 
until  finally  all  difficulties  were  removed  through  the 
amendment  of  the  Constitution  in  1899.  The  law  which 
is  now  in  force  was  passed  at  the  last  session  of  the 
legislature  and  will  be  discussed  at  length,  while  the 
three  preceding  acts  will  be  treated  only  to  the  extent 
of  a  general  comparison  in  order  to  bring  out  their  im- 
portant differences  and  resemblances,  most  of  which  are 
due  to  the  attempts  on  part  of  the  succeeding  legisla- 
tures to  meet  the  decisions  of  the  courts. 

All  three  laws  of  1895,  1897,  and  1899,  which  regu- 
lated  the   election   of   delegates   to  conventions,   were 

'  Session  Laws  of  California,  1805,  p.  208. 
»  Session  Laws  of  California,  1897,  p.  115. 

*  Session  Laws  of  California,  1899,  p.  47. 

♦  Session  Laws  of  California,  1901,  p.  606. 


Delegate  Convention  in  California.  197 

compulsory,  and  provided  for  primaries  to  be  held  at 
the  public  expense.  Concurrent  primaries,  or  primaries 
participated  in  by  all  parties  on  the  same  day  and  at 
the  same  polling  booths,  were  established.  Only  one  bal- 
lot box  was  to  be  used.  But  the  laws  of  1895  and  1897 
provided  for  separate  and  colored  ballots  for  the  differ- 
ent parties,  while  the  1899  law,  permitting,  as  it  did, 
the  voter  to  vote  the  ticket  of  any  party,  required  only 
one  ballot  for  all  parties.  The  law  of  1895  applied  only 
to  counties  of  the  first  and  second  class,  and  upon  this 
ground  was  declared  unconstitutional  as  being  "local 
and  special"  in  character.^  As  a  result  the  law  of  1891 
was  extended  to  the  entire  State,  but  a  new  feature  was 
introduced  in  the  form  of  a  test  for  participation  in  the 
primary  under  which  the  voter  was  required  to  declare 
his  present  intention  of  supporting  the  candidates  of 
the  party  at  the  next  election.  The  court  did  not  pass 
judgment  upon  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  prescribe 
such  a  test,  but  contented  itself  by  merely  pointing  out 
the  grave  dangers  incident  to  the  exercise  of  such  a 
power,  and  then  declared  the  law  unconstitutional  upon 
the  ground  that  it  was  special  legislation,  and  discrimi- 
nated in  favor  of  and  against  certain  classes  of  persons. 
Then  came  the  law  of  1899,  which,  like  its  predeces- 
sor, was  compulsory  throughout  the  entire  State,  and 
sought  to  eliminate  the  unconstitutional  features  of  the 
law  of  1897  by  avoiding  conflict  with  those  specific  pro- 
visions of  the  Constitution  which  had  created  the  diffi- 
culty with  the  preceding  act.     It  also  abolished  the 

'  For  a  detailed  discussion  of  the  question  of  constitutionality,  see  Part  UI, 
chapter  X. 


198  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

declaration  of  party  affiliation,  and  permitted  each  and 
every  voter  to  vote  the  ballot  of  any  party,  provided  he 
had  been  duly  registered.  In  this  respect  it  was  a  return 
to  the  law  of  1895.  But  the  supreme  court  a  third  time 
decided  adversely.  The  difficulty  now  was  that  the 
"open  primary"  system-  afforded  no  protection  what- 
ever to  party  organizations,  and  hence  interfered  with 
the  voter's  right  to  nominate  through  the  medium  of 
his  own  party;  and  that  the  law  discriminated  against 
parties  having  cast  less  than  three  per  cent,  of  the  total 
vote  at  the  last  election,  by  preventing  them  from  hold- 
ing primaries  under  its  protection  and  regulation. 

The  legislature  now  had  but  two  alternatives,  to  give 
up  the  idea  of  passing  any  law,  or  to  amend  the  Constitu- 
tion. It  adopted  the  latter  course,  and  in  1899  passed  an 
amendment  which  completely  removed  all  difficulties. 
The  chances  of  the  law  of  1901  to  pass  the  supreme  court 
in  safety  are  very  good  considering  the  completeness  with 
which  this  amendment  covers  the  unconstitutional  diffi- 
culties raised  against  the  preceding  acts.  The  amend- 
ment reads  as  follows :  "The  legislature  shall  have  the 
power  to  enact  laws  relative  to  the  election  of  delegates 
to  conventions  of  political  parties  at  elections  known  and 
designated  as  primary  elections."  This  limits  the  power 
to  legislate  respecting  primaries  held  for  the  election  of 
delegates,  and  not  for  the  nomination  of  candidates. 
Should  the  legislature  desire  to  establish  direct  pri- 
maries for  nominations  to  office,  it  would  raise  the  ques- 
tion of  the  necessity  of  amending  the  Constitution  again, 
or  of  letting  the  law  run  its  chances  with  the  courts. 

>  See  Part  m,  ch.  IX 


Delegate  Convention  in  California.  199 

The  legislature  shall  also  have  the  power:  "To  deter- 
mine the  tests  and  conditions  npon  which  electors,  polit- 
ical parties,  or  organizations  of  voters,  may  participate 
in  any  such  primary  election,  which  tests  or  conditions 
may  be  different  from  the  tests  and  conditions  required 
and  permitted  at  other  elections  authorized  by  law." 
Three  difficulties  are  here  removed:  (1)  That  of  the 
power  of  imposing  a  test;  (2)  that  of  determining  the 
strength  of  party  requisite  for  participation  in  the  pri- 
mary as  a  party;  (3)  and  that  of  a  conflict  with  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  respecting  "other  elections 
authorized  by  law."  "Or  the  legislature  may  delegate 
the  power  to  determine  such  tests  or  conditions  at  pri- 
mary elections  to  the  various  political  parties  participat- 
ing therein."  This  leaves  an  opening  for  the  trial  of  a 
party  test  which  was  decided  to  be  the  only  constitu- 
tional form  of  test  in  one  of  the  decisions  of  the  supreme 
court.  ^ 

"It  shall  be  lawful  for  the  legislature  to  prescribe  that 
any  such  primary  election  law  be  obligatory  and  man- 
datory in  any  city,  or  in  any  city  or  county,  or  in  any 
county,  or  in  any  political  subdivision  of  a  designated 
population,  and  that  such  law  shall  be  optional  in  any 
city,  city  and  county,  or  political  subdivision  of  a  lesser 
population,  and  for  such  purpose  such  law  may  declare 
the  population  of  any  city,  city  and  county,  county,  or 
political  subdivision,  and  may  also  provide  what,  if 
any,  compensation  primary  election  officers  in  defined 
places,  or  political  subdivisions,  may  receive  without 
making  compensation  either  general  or  uniform."    This 

«  See  Part  m,  ch.  X. 


200  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

disposes  of  the  objection  of  "local  or  special  legislation," 
and  of  the  right  to  compensate  public  officers  upon  a 
basis  other  than  that  already  provided  by  the  Constitu- 
tion. 

The  legislature  clothed  with  this  new  power  was  no 
longer  forced  to  legislate  to  suit  the  courts,  but  was  en- 
abled to  enact  legislation  in  accordance  with  its  own  no- 
tions. The  result  was  a  new  law  which  is  mandatory 
in  citieSj  and  in  cities  and  counties,  having  a  popula- 
tion of  over  7,500,  and  hence  applies  to  the  city  and 
county  of  San  Francisco,  and  the  cities  of  Oakland, 
Sacramento,  San  Jose,  San  Diego,  Los  Angeles,  Stock- 
ton, Alameda,  Berkely,  Fresno,  Pasadena,  and  Vallejo. 
In  other  parts  of  the  State  it  may  be  adopted  by  the  ma- 
jority vote,  upon  the  submission  of  the  question  to  the 
electors  through  petition  of  a  number  of  voters  equal  to 
one-half  of  the  total  vote  cast  in  the  last  general  election. 
It  may  be  rendered  inap2:)licable  by  a  similar  vote. 

The  general  election  laws  are  extended  to  the  direct 
primary  as  far  as  applicable.  The  conduct  of  the  pri- 
maries is  to  resemble  that  of  other  elections,  with  the 
exception  that  but  one  ballot  box  is  to  be  used  at  each 
polling  place ;  that  the  primary  officers,  consisting  of  an 
inspector,  two  judges,  two  clerks,  and  one  ballot  clerk, 
shall  receive  a  compensation  of  two  dollars;  and  that 
there  shall  be  no  more  ballots  printed  than  there  are 
names  upon  the  registry  book.  Only  those  political  par- 
ties which  cast  at  least  three  per  cent,  of  the  entire  vote 
polled  at  the  last  preceding  election,  are  allowed  to  par- 
ticipate, although  an  opportunity  is  given  for  the  organ- 
ization of  new  parties  by  permitting  a  political  party 
to  participate  upon  the  presentation  of  a  petition  con- 


Delegate  Convention  in  California.  201 

talning  a  number  of  signatures  equal  to  at  least  three 
per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  cast  at  the  last  election. 

Every  qualified  party  must,  at  least  forty  days  before 
the  primary,  file  a  writing  known  as  a  "petition,"  with 
the  secretary  of  state  in  case  of  a  state  or  district  pri- 
mary, duly  authenticating  the  party,  and  declaring  that 
it  is  the  intention  of  the  party  to  hold  a  state  or  district 
convention  for  the  nomination  of  certain  specified  ofii- 
cers,  or  for  the  purpose  of  filling  a  vacancy,  and  request- 
ing that  a  place  be  given  to  it  upon  the  primary  election 
ballot.  Similar  petitions  must  be  made  by  the  parties 
in  case  of  lower  conventions,  and  filed  with  the  proper 
officers  at  least  thirty  days  before  the  primary.  In  case 
of  those  petitions  which  are  filed  by  senatorial  or  assem- 
bly district  committees,  statement  must  be  made  whether 
the  same  delegates  to  the  state  convention  residing  with- 
in the  district  shall  nominate  the  candidate  for  senator  or 
assemblyman  in  the  district,  or  whether  a  separate  set 
of  delegates  are  to  perform  this  function,  and  unless 
such  statement  is  made,  the  delegates  to  the  state  conven- 
tion are  to  exercise  both  functions.  The  same  general 
provision  applies  to  local  conventions. 

The  petition  must  also  state  the  number  of  delegates 
who  are  to  compose  the  convention,  and  specify  the  basis 
of  the  apportionment  upon  which  they  are  to  be  elected, 
M'hich  apportionment  must  be  the  same  for  all  sub- 
divisions, and  in  case  of  local  conventions  must  be  speci- 
fied in  detail.  Where  the  petition  fails  to  make  the 
proper  apportionment,  the  board  of  election  commis- 
sioners is  empowered  to  do  so,  except  in  case  of  failure 
to  make  an  apportionment  for  a  state  convention,  in 


202  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

■which  case  this  duty  must  be  attended  to  by  the  jiroper 
party  coimuittee  within  ten  days  after  the  receipt  of  the 
required  notice  from  the  secretary  of  state, -^  stating  that 
copies  of  the  petition  for  a  place  upon  the  primary  elec- 
tion ballot  have  been  transmitted  to  the  election  com- 
missioners in  the  various  counties  and  cities  within  the 
State.  Primary  elections  are  held  on  the  second  Tues- 
day in  August  in  each  even-numbered  year  for  the  elec- 
tion of  delegates  to  all  state,  district,  and  local  conven- 
tions, and  on  the  same  day  in  odd-numbered  years,  where 
general  elections  are  held  in  any  county.  Where  city  or 
town  elections  are  not  held  on  the  same  day  with  other 
elections,  special  primaries  are  to  be  held  on  the  sixth 
Tuesday  preceding  the  general  election.  The  board  of 
election  commissioners  appoints  the  primary  election 
officers,  and  determines  the  primary  election  precincts, 
which  must  not  include  more  than  three  contiguous  gen- 
eral election  precincts.  Gerrymandering  is  to  some  ex- 
tent prevented  by  a  provision  that  assembly,  supervis- 
oral,  and  ward  lines  must  be  respected.  Each  party  uses 
its  OAvn  distinct  ballots.  The  various  conventions  to 
which  delegates  are  to  be  elected  are  designated,  as  well 
as  the  number  of  delegates  to  be  chosen.  The  names  of 
the  delegates  are  not  printed  upon  the  ballots,  but  the 
voter  is  required  to  put  down  his  own  choice,  or  to  at- 
tach a  slip  of  white  paper  containing  the  names  of  his 
choice  in  the  proper  place  on  the  ballot  "with  any  ad- 
hesive substance."  ^  Any  ballot  containing  the  names 
of  delegates  to  more  than  one  convention  for  the  same 

•  This  notice  is  sent  prior  to  forty  days  before  the  primary. 

•  See  Part  111,  ch.  Xm,  on  the  preparation  of  a  ballot. 


Delegate  Convention  in  California.  203 

ierritory  will  be  disregarded.*  In  case  of  a  tie  vote,  tlie 
convention  determines  which  delegate  shall  sit  and  act. 

The  qualifications  and  the  registration  of  voters,  and 
the  privilege  of  attending  the  primaries,  are  subject  to 
the  same  provisions  in  the  Constitution  and  in  the  Polit- 
ical Code,  which  govern  general  elections.  When  a  new 
registration  list  is  not  completed  in  time  to  be  of  service 
at  the  primary,  the  old  list,  together  with  all  corrections 
and  changes  made  up  to  witliin  ten  days  of  the  primary 
election,^  is  to  be  used.  In  order  to  vote,  the  name,  ad- 
dress, and  party  for  whose  delegates  the  voter,  in  good 
faith,  intends  to  vote,  must  be  written  upon  the  roster 
of  voters.  The  ballot  clerk  then  announces  the  same,  and 
if  a  challenge  is  made  the  voter  must  declare  that  it  is 
his  hona  fide  present  intention  of  supporting  the  nomi- 
nees of  such  political  party  at  the  next  general  election. 

Conventions  are  considered  legal  even  though  a  pre- 
cinct or  political  division  has  failed  to  send  representa- 
tives. A  majority  is  to  constitute  a  quorum,  and  each  con- 
vention passes  upon  the  election  and  qualification  of  its 
own  members.  Proper  credentials  are  issued  and  re- 
corded. If  any  delegate  refuses  to  act,  he  renders  him- 
self liable  to  a  civil  suit  in  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dol- 
lars, brought  in  the  name  of  the  State.  This  sum,  to- 
gether with  the  costs,  is  to  be  paid  into  the  treasury  of 
the  county,  or  of  the  city  and  county.  Provision  is 
made  that  where  no  "board  of  election  commissioners" 
exists,  the  common  council,  board  of  trustees,  or  board 
of  supervisors,  is  to  assume  the  functions  of  the  board 
under  the  law.    Where  the  rule  is  mandatory,  "presiden- 

'  See  Oregon  decision,  Part  III,  ch.  X 
a  This  is  the  last  day  of  registration. 


20i  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

tial  primaries"  are  held  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  May 
for  the  purpose  of  choosing  delegates  to  state  and  district 
conventions  to  select  delegates  to  a  national  convention; 
provided,  that  where  the  national  convention  of  any 
party  comes  before  the  fifteenth  of  May,  delegates  to 
the  same  may  be  selected  in  accordance  with  such  rules 
as  the  party  may  prescribe.  The  ballots  cast  at  the  pri- 
maries are  to  be  preserved  until  after  the  adjournment 
of  the  convention,  and  may  be  produced  to  decide  con- 
tested elections.  In  case  of  vacancy  by  death,  the  re- 
maining delegates  from  the  territory  or  assembly  district 
have  the  power  to  determine  by  a  majority  vote  which  of 
the  delegates  may  cast  an  additional  vote  in  the  conven- 
tion. 

The  California  law,  as  briefly  outlined  here,  is  a  most 
thorough  one,  and  probably  ranks  as  the  best  of  its  kind. 
It  plainly  shows  the  result  of  years  of  hard  thinking 
over  the  reform  of  the  caucus  and  convention  system, 
and  ought  to  prove  itself  a  most  decided  improvement 
over  previous  methods  of  nomination  in  that  State.  Con- 
tinuing, however,  as  it  does,  the  complete  and  intricate 
convention  system,  it  must  be  looked  upon  as  modifying 
rather  than  as  eradicating  the  evils  of  corrupt  politics. 

Illinois. 

In  Illinois  the  primary  has  been  the  subject  of  more 
than  tlie  ordinary  amount  of  legislation.  One  might 
naturally  ex]>ect  this  where  population,  industry,  and 
wealtli  abound  as  they  do  in  Chicago.  In  that  city  the 
primary  early  fell  a  prey  to  the  corrupt  politicians.  Mu- 
nicipal government,  with  its  countless  duties,  its  offices, 


Delegate  Convention  in  Illinois.  205 

and  officers,  was  too  rich  a  spoil  long  to  escape  the  pol- 
luting hand  of  the  boodle  alderman  and  the  "machine" 
politician.  Political  liberty  could  not  long  remain  pure 
and  unperverted  where  the  rewards  for  its  betrayal  were 
so  tempting.  Party  organization  could  not  long  escape 
the  selfish  thirst  of  one-man-power.  Law  wa^  first  re- 
sorted to  for  the  removal  of  the  evils  which  had  crept 
into  the  nominating  machinery  of  the  State  in  1885.^ 
Four  years  later  in  1889,^  a  more  complete  law  was 
passed  governing  primary  elections.  This  remained  in 
force  for  nine  years,  and  was  followed  by  a  still  more 
thorough  act,^  which,  however,  was  destined  to  stand 
for  but  one  vear:  and  in  1899  the  law  noAV  in  force  was 
placed  upon  the  statute  books  of  the  State.^ 

It  would  be  tedious,  as  well  as  unprofitable,  to  enter 
into  an  elaborate  discussion  of  each  of  these  laws.  They 
were  not  direct  primary  laws  for  the  nomination  of  can- 
didates, but  were  framed  to  secure  improvement  in  the 
selection  of  delegates  to  conventions.  It  will  probably 
be  sufficient  to  merely  indicate  their  main  bearings.  The 
laws  of  1885  and  1889  were  optional,  and  left  consider- 
able power  in  the  hands  of  political  parties.  It  is  true 
that  they  contained  detailed  regulations  respecting  the 
proper  publication  of  the  notices  of  primary  elections, 
and  the  manner  of  voting,  as  well  as  for  the  canvassing 
and  returning  of  the  votes.  Yet  the  party  committee 
alone  decided  upon  the  time  and  place  of  holding  the  pri- 
mary.    It  also  determined  who  might  participate  in  the 

>  Session  Laws  of  Illinois,  1885,  p.  187. 
«  Session  Laws  of  Illinois,  1889.  p.  140. 
'Session  Laws  of  Illinois,  1808,  p.  11. 
*  Session  Laws  of  Illinois,  18'J9,  p.  Sll. 


206  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

same,  and  chose  the  officers  who  were  to  conduct  them. 
Moreover,  since  the  party  committee  was  to  decide 
whether  the  law  should  apply  to  the  primary  elections 
of  the  party  or  not,  an  opportunity  was  presented  com- 
pletely to  avoid  the  law  by  refusing  to  adopt  it. 

Where  politicians  control  party  organization  and  se- 
lect party  officials,  it  is  plain  that  optional  laws,  such 
as  those  of  Illinois,  would  very  likely  be  dead  letters. 
What  wonder  that  the  primaries  of  the  State  not  only 
failed  to  improve,  but  rapidly  gTew  worse.  More  thor- 
ough and  drastic  steps  were  necessary.  As  a  result  a 
new  move  was  made  at  the  extra  session  of  the  legisla- 
ture in  1898.  The  only  hope  lay  in  a  compulsory  law. 
A  most  thorough  measure  was  drawn,  but  the  opposition 
of  politicians  was  so  fierce  that  several  of  its  most  effect- 
ive provisions  had  to  be  compromised.  As  a  result  there 
were  introduced  a  sufficient  number  of  loopholes  to  en- 
able the  political  "bosses"  to  manipulate  their  "wires" 
quite  as  successfully,  if  not  as  easily,  as  before.  This 
law  of  1898  was  so  decidedly  worsted  by  politicians  in 
its  passage,  as  to  be  called  a  "machine"  product.-^  It  re- 
mained in  force  but  one  vear,  and  in  1899  was  followed 
by  a  somewhat  improved,  yet  imperfect  act,  which,  how- 
ever, largely  failed  to  Jemonstrate  such  reformative 
powers  as  its  friends  hoped  it  might  possess. 

The  law  does  not  establish  the  direct  vote  svstera,  but 
provides  for  the  primary  election  of  delegates  to  con- 
ventions. It  is  compulsory  in  counties  of  125,000  in- 
liabitants  or  more.  In  all  other  counties  it  may  be 
adopted  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  party  when  1,000,  or 

'  How  to  Reform  the  Primary,  Arena,  June,  1897,  p.  1017. 


Delegate  Convention  in  Illinois.  207 

at  least  one-eightli,  of  tlie  party  voters  have  petitioned 
for  the  submission  of  the  proposition  of  its  adoption  to 
a  popular  vote.  The  question  is  then  to  be  voted  upon  at 
the  next  state  or  county  election  upon  at  least  ten  days' 
notice.  Only  those  political  parties  which  cast  at  least  ten 
per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  at  the  last  preceding  election 
are  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  the  act.  No  concurrent 
primaries  are  held,  as  in  the  case  of  California,  for  ex- 
ample, but  each  party  has  its  own  days,  preference  iu 
the  choice  of  a  primary  date  going  to  the  party  which  ap- 
plies first.  The  expense  of  primaries  is  public,  and  is 
paid  out  of  the  county  or  the  city  treasury,  according  as 
the  primary  election  is  held  for  the  selection  of  dele- 
gates to  county  or  to  city  conventions.  From  the  point 
of  view  of  economy,  and  for  other  important  reasons,  it 
is  highly  desirable  to  have  the  primaries  of  all  parties 
held  on  the  same  day  and  at  the  same  places.  The  pri- 
mary election  ofiicers  and  three  judges  and  two  clerks, 
members  of  the  same  party,  are  selected  by  the  party 
committee  from  the  list  of  general  election  ofiicers  resi- 
dent within  the  district. 

Any  party  which  desires  to  hold  a  primary  election 
must,  at  least  fifteen  days  before,  make  an  application 
to  the  board  of  election  commissioners.  If  no  other 
party  has  already  applied,  it  has  a  complete  choice  of 
dat«s,  and  may  then  issue  its  call  which  must  set  forth 
the  name  of  the  party ;  the  day  of  the  primary ;  the  place 
of  voting;  the  names  of  primary  election  officers;  the 
name,  place,  and  time  of  the  conventions  for  which  dele- 
gates are  to  be  selected  ;  the  number  of  delegates  for  each 
district,  proportioned  according  to  voting  strength,  and 


208  Direct  Primanj  Legislation. 

the  name  of  some  newspaper  in  which  the  party  intends 
to  publish  its  notices. 

1^0  formal  test  of  party  affiliation  is  required,  but  all 
persons  possessing  general  election  qualifications  for  vot- 
ing may  participate  in  the  primary,  provided  they  are 
members  of  the  party  and  have  not  voted  at  any  other 
primary.  ]\Iembership  in  a  party  "may  be  proved  by  evi- 
dence of  general  reputation  in  the  neighborhood,  where 
said  defendant  resided  at  that  time."  Any  qualified 
elector  may  be  selected  as  delegate  provided  he  is  no 
primary  election  officer.  One  alternate  is  chosen,  and  if 
no  delegate  or  alternate  appears,  the  vacancy  is  filled  by 
the  remaining  delegates  from  that  political  division  in 
which  it  occurs.  The  polls  are  to  be  open  from  one 
o'clock  to  seven  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  voter  after 
having  marked  his  ballot  must  fold  it  so  as  to  display 
the  judge's  initials,  as  well  as  its  number  which  must 
correspond  to  the  number  entered  in  the  poll  books  that 
are  kept.  Each  ticket  of  delegates  is  permitted  to  be 
represented  by  a  challenger  chosen  by  the  majority  of 
those  named  for  delegates  on  any  particular  ticket.  In 
order  to  discourage  the  stuffing  of  ballot  boxes,  any  ex- 
cess in  the  number  of  ballots  as  indicated  by  the  poll 
books  is  drawn  out  and  destroyed.  In  the  course  of  the 
canvass,  which  must  proceed  uninterruptedly,  all  bal- 
lots which  do  not  correspond  with  each  other  in  names 
or  conventions  are  counted  separately  from  those  which 
are  alike  in  this  respect.  The  act  details  and  penalizes 
a  large  number  of  corrupt  practices. 

While  this  law  has  wrought  considerable  improvement 
over  the  preceding  condition  of  the  primaries,  it  never- 
theless leaves  one  of  the  main  difficulties  unsolved.    The 


Delegate  Convention  in  Illinois,  209 

convention  system  remains  undisturbed.  Only  one 
county  in  the  State  is  covered  by  the  law.  "Machine" 
politics,  while  it  is  checked,  continues  to  exist,  more  ag- 
gressive and  more  alert  to  every  opportunity  which  may 
present  itself  for  the  exercise  of  its  baneful  influence. 
Dissatisfaction  with  this  state  of  things  has  led  to  some 
discussion  in  favor  of  the  abolition  of  the  convention 
system  and  the  nomination  of  officers  by  direct  vote.  In 
harmony  with  this  movement  a  direct  primary  bill  was 
introduced  into  the  legislature  of  Illinois  during  the  last 
year,  which,  since  it  contains  the  latest  estimate  of  what 
the  primary  reformers  of  that  State  believe  to  point  the 
way  of  escape  from  the  pernicious  control  of  corrupt  pol- 
iticians in  the  nomination  of  public  officers,  is  briefly 
outlined  below.^     The  bill  was  comprehensive  in  scope^ 

'  The  contemplated  law  was  compulsory  and  applied  to  the  entire  State.    It 
was  controlling  for  all  political  parties  which  had  cast  at  least  10  per  cent,  of 
the  total  vote  at  the  last  election,  in  the  holding  of  all  primaries  for  the  nomi- 
nation of  all  officers,  except  trustees  of  schools,  school  directors,  members  of 
boards  of  education,  and  officers  of  road  districts  in  coimties  not  under  township 
organization.    Any  new  poUtical  parties  might  avail  themselves  of  the  benefits 
of  the  law  by  presenting  a  petition  signed  by  at  least  10  per  cent,  of  the  voters 
of  the  political  division.    In  order  that  a  candidate  might  have  his  name  placed 
upon  the  primary  election  ballot,  he  was  required  to  present  a  petition  signed 
by  at  least  5  per  cent,  of  the  voters  of  the  political  division,  and  to  pay  ten  dol- 
lars to  the  county  clerk,  accompanied  by  an  affidavit  to  the  effect  that  it  was 
his  bona  fide  present  intention  to  run  for  the  nomination  in  the  given  office. 
Nomiuations  by  petition  were  to  be  continued  under  the  general  election  laws 
as  before.    All  parties  were  to  hold  primaries  on  the  same  day,  which  was  also 
to  be  registration  day.    The  open  primary  system,  under  which  no  declaration 
of  party  afflhation  is  required,  was  to  be  used,  but  no  elector  was  free  to  vote 
unless  his  name  appeared  upon  the  last  register,  or  he  was  qualified  to  vote  at 
the  next  general  election.    Every  voter  was  obliged  to  confine  himself  to  one 
ticket.    If  tickets  were  "split,"  only  the  one  containing  the  largest  number  of 
names  was  to  be  counted,  or  if  an  equal  number  of  marks  were  discovered  on 
two  or  more  tickets,  all  were  to  be  rejected.    A  canvassing  board  was  pro- 
vided for,  consisting  of  the  clerk  of  the  circuit  court,  the  county  clerk,  the 
county  judge,  and  two  justices  of  the  peace  of  opposite  political  faith  from  that 
of  the  majority  of  the  other  members.    The  justices  were  to  be  selected  by  the 
couaty  judge. 
14 


210  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

and  plainly  showed  the  influence  of  the  successful  Hen- 
nepin county  law  of  1899.  The  holding  of  concurrent 
primaries;  registration  upon  primary  election  day;  the 
requirements  of  a  petition,  a  fee,  and  an  affidavit;  the 
open  primary  system — all  these  were  important  provi- 
sions in  the  Minnesota  law. 

The  enactment  of  the  law  would  have  resulted  in  a 
most  sweeping  and  effective  change.  It  would  have 
revolutionized  politics  and  restored  to  the  people  a  voice 
in  government.  Instead  of  tottering  upon  the  apex  of 
one-man-power,  Illinois  politics  would  once  more  have 
found  a  firm  rest  upon  the  base  of  democracy.  The  con- 
vention, that  old,  familiar  institution,  would  have  been 
wiped  out  completely.  In  its  place  there  would  have 
been  put  a  new  system,  unfamiliar  to  the  voter,  to  the 
candidate,  and  to  the  politician,  which  would  have  re- 
quired new  methods.  No  thorough  and  systematic 
movement  for  the  abolition  of  the  caucus  and  conven- 
tion system  had  been  carried  forward  over  the  State.  It 
was  therefore  no  marvel  that  those  men,  who  had  not  yet 
thoroughly  studied  into  the  nature  and  effect  of  such  a 
measure,  were  unprepared  to  give  it  their  support  The 
education  of  the  public  into  a  full  understanding  of  the 
advantages  of  direct  nominations  must  necessarily  be  a 
slow  process,  and  even  though  Illinois  primary  re- 
formers failed  in  their  efforts,  balked  as  they  were  by 
^'machine"  politics  and  by  an  unripe  public  sentiment, 
there  is  no  cause  for  despondency,  for  the  history  of  pri- 
mary reform  in  all  the  States  illustrates  the  fact  that 
repeated  efforts  invariably  bring  success. 


Zfelegate  Convention  in  Washington.  211 

Wasrij^gtoit. 

In  Washini^on  no  direct  primary  legislation  has  as 
yet  been  enacted,  although  primary  election  laws  relating 
to  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions  were  passed  in 
1890  and  1895.  The  act  of  1890  was  optional  and  ex- 
tremely imperfect.  Dissatisfaction  with  its  operation 
led  to  the  enactment  of  a  less  defective  and  compulsory 
act  in  1895j  which  is  still  in  force. ^  It  also  concerns 
itself  only  with  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions, 
and  is  mandatory  in  all  the  incorporated  cities  and 
towns  of  the  State.  A  new  feature  is  found  in  the  pro^ 
vision  that  persons  to  be  voted  for  as  delegates  are  to  be 
selected  in  excess  by  at  least  twice  the  number  to  be 
selected  in  each  polling  precinct,  and  that  this  selection 
is  to  be  made  at  least  one  day  previous  to  the  primary, 
by  a  caucus  of  qualified  voters  in  each  precinct.  It  would 
seem  that  a  caucus  of  this  kind,  formed  back  of  the 
primary,  and  entirely  extra-legal  in  character,  would 
ultimately  fall  a  prey  to  the  politician  just  as  did  the 
party-regulated  caucus  and  primary.  There  is  nothing 
to  prevent  the  formation  of  a  ''machine"  which  might 
control  the  caucus,  and  place  its  delegates.  The  voter  is, 
however,  not  forced  to  support  the  "machine"  delegates 
which  may  be  put  up  at  the  caucus.  The  law  makes  a 
provision  for  such  a  contingency  by  permitting  any 
voter  who  is  dissatisfied  with  the  delegates  who  were 
nominated,  to  insert  or  add  any  names  of  delegates  for 
whom  he  may  wish  to  vote.  This  must  prove  ineffectual 
because  of  lack  of  previous  agreement  of  the  individual 

>  Session  Laws  of  Washington,  1890,  p.  419. 
'  Session  Laws  of  Washington,  1895,  p.  361. 


212  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

voters  upon  the  same  candidates.  This  same  caucus  is 
also  empowered  to  select  three  reputable  citizens  as  pri- 
mary election  officers.  The  qualifications  of  voters, 
candidates,  and  delegates  are  briefly  laid  down,  and  an 
open,  uninterrupted  canvass  of  the  vote  is  provided  for. 
While  the  Washington  law  of  1895  is  a  great  improve- 
ment over  the  extra-legal  caucus  and  convention  system^ 
it  is  nevertheless  very  imperfect.  Because  of  the  free- 
dom retained  by  the  political  parties,  too  much  irrespon- 
sible ]JOwer  is  lodged  in  the  hands  of  the  party  authori- 
ties. Where  political  combinations  have  entered  into 
politics,  the  operation  of  a  delegate  system,  such  as 
is  established  by  the  Washington  statute,  cannot  but 
yield  more  or  less  unsatisfactory  results. 


CHAPTEK  IX. 

DIRECT  PRIMARIES  IN  MINNESOTA. 

Minnesota  probably  ranks  first  in  the  race  for  better 
primaries.  The  new  direct  primary  law  enacted  in  this 
State  is  nnapproached  anywhere  else  in  the  country.  It 
proceeds  from  reform  agitation  which  is  of  compara- 
tively recent  origin,  and  belongs  mainly  to  the  last  four 
years.  Yet,  in  the  course  of  this  brief  space  of  time, 
the  movement  for  better  primaries  has  obtained  a 
strength  and  foothold  which  is  bound  to  keep  it  close  to 
the  front.  Experience  seems  to  have  taught  the  people 
of  the  State  a  most  wholesome  lesson,  and  after  having 
once  overcome  their  misgivings  and  prejudices  against 
institutions  whose  birth  was  marred  by  the  abuses  and 
misrepresentations  of  bitter  enmity,  they  succeeded  in 
placing  themselves  upon  record  at  the  last  session  of  the 
legislature  as  generally  satisfied  with  their  experience 
in  direct  primaries,  by  enacting  an  extensive  and  com- 
plete law  which  will  be  closely  followed  in  its  operation 
by  men  in  every  State  of  the  Union. 

As  late  as  six  years  ago,  the  primaries  of  Minnesota 
had  not  yet  been  made  the  subject  of  legislation,  their 
entire  conduct  resting  with  the  political  parties.  As 
elsewhere  in  the  country,  their  extra-legal  position  re- 
sulted in  many  abuses,  underhanded  practices,  and  open 
corruption,  which  attained  such  proportions  that  in 
1895  there  was  a  general  demand  for  action  on  part  of 


214  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

the  legislature.  In  response  to  this  feeling,  a  caucus 
law  was  enacted  in  this  year,  which  aimed  to  remedy 
the  most  offensive  practices  that  had  grown  up,  by  legal- 
izing the  caucuses;  by  requiring  ample  publication  of 
the  time  and  place  of  meeting ;  and  finally,  by  giving  the 
convention  itself  a  standing  in  law. 

So  far  direct  primaries  had  not  been  discussed,  but 
the  first  step  in  this  direction  had  been  taken.  The  body 
electorate  of  the  State  had  been  roused  to  thought  and 
action  upon  the  matter  of  primary  reform;  the  legisla- 
ture had  responded  to  tne  popular  will ;  and  harmony  for 
the  prosecution  of  a  common  purpose  seemed  to  be 
abroad.  Under  the  law  of  1895  the  primary,  however, 
still  proved  itself  open  to  "machine"  control,  and  the 
convention  with  its  abundant  possibilities  of  corruption, 
"trading,"  and  "log-rolling,"  continued  as  before — a 
standing  menace  to  popular  government.  The  neces- 
sity of  a  more  radical  and  thorough  reform  was  appar- 
ent, and  found  its  first  expression  in  the  Hicks  direct 
primary  bill,  which  was  introduced  into  the  legislature 
in  1897.  This  bill  proposed  to  apply  the  Australian 
ballot  system  of  voting  to  the  primaries,  and  what  was 
more  important,  aimed  at  the  entire  abolition  of  the  con- 
vention system.  Every  voter  was  to  be  given  a  direct 
choice  of  candidates  for  public  office  by  being  given  an 
official  ballot,  containing  the  names  of  the  offices  with 
blank  spaces  for  the  names  of  candidates  who  happened 
to  be  the  voter's  choice. 

The  enactment  O'f  this  bill  would  have  meant  the  abo- 
lition of  "machine"  politics;  the  destruction  of  the 
notorious  "rings"  of  politicians  who  had  dominated  the 


Direct  Prunaries  in  Minnesota.  215 

great  municipalities  of  the  State ;  and  the  restoration  to 
the  people  of  their  power  to  choose  the  men  who  were  to 
carry  on  the  government  of  the  Commonwealth.  Though 
the  bill  received  encouraging  and  enthusiastic  support, 
opposition  from  politicians  and  from  those  who  had  not 
yet  been  educated  into  a  thorough  understanding  of  the 
measure  resulted  in  its  defeat.  All  that  was  accom- 
plished in  the  way  of  primary  legislation  in  1897  was 
the  passage  of  a  law  to  supersede  the  act  of  1895.  It 
was  based  upon  the  same  principle  as  the  latter,  and 
merely  governed  in  greater  detail  the  party  action  at 
the  caucuses  in  the  nomination  of  local  candidates  and 
in  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions. 

^Nothing  daunted  by  their  defeat,  the  primary  re- 
formers redoubled  their  efforts,  continued  their  study 
of  primary  legislation  in  practical  operation  elsewhere, 
circulated  publications  throughout  the  State  explaining 
the  nature  and  effect  of  the  direct  vote  system,  educated 
the  public  into  a  more  thorough  understanding  of  the 
reform,  made  it  an  issue  in  the  campaign,  and  framed 
bills  which  were  comprehensive  in  scope  and  sweeping  in 
effect.  In  1899,  some  three  separate  measures  were 
brought  before  the  legislature.  All  incorporated  the 
Australian  ballot  system,  but  differed  otherwise  in  their 
methods  of  approaching  a  solution  of  the  problem.  Long 
and  heated  discussions  followed,  with  the  result  that  the 
best,  and  apparently  most  practicable,  features  of  the 
three  were  combined,  presented  to  the  House  as  a  sub- 
stitute bill,  and  sent  to  the  Senate  by  an  almost  unani- 
mous vote.  This  bill  which  had  been  drawn  so  as  to 
apply  to  the  counties  containing  the  cities  of  the  first 
class,  St.  Paul,  Minneapolis,  and  Duluth,  was  amended 


216  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

in  the  Senate  by  limiting  its  operation  to  Hennepin 
county,  including  the  city  of  Minneapolis,  and  in  that 
form  was  put  upon  the  statute  books,  as  the  now  famous 
Hennepin  county  direct  primary  law.^  After  a  gen- 
erally successful  trial  in  the  year  1900,  the  Hennepin 
county  system  was  extended  to  the  entire  State,  as  a  re- 
sult of  an  amendment  to  the  original  act,  passed  by  the 
legislature  in  1901.  As  it  now  stands,  the  Minnesota 
law  incorporates  the  most  extensive  system  of  direct 
primaries  yet  placed  on  trial  anywhere  in  the  United 
States,  Should  success  again  follow  on  this  broader 
scale,  and  there  is  no  reason  why  failure  should  be  looked 
for,  then  the  cause  of  popular  nominations  will  have 
received  the  best  practical  support  and  the  strongest 
justification,  that  has  come  to  it  during  its  entire  his- 
tory. 

The  Minnesota  law  as  it  now  stands  is  as  follows  :- 
Section  1  provides  for  the  holding  of  primary  elections 
at  least  seven  weeks  before  any  general  election  for  the 
nomination  of  all  elective  officers  in  the  State,  except 
state  officers  who  are  chosen  wholly  by  the  electors  of  the 
entire  State,  and  elective  members  of  school,  park,  and 
library  boards  in  cities  having  a  population  of  50,000 
or  less.^  Primary  electi9n  day  is  made  the  first  day  of 
registration,  as  provided  for  by  law. 

Section  2.  The  law  is  applicable  only  to  those  po- 
litical parties  which  cast  at  least  ten  per  cent,  of  the 

>  The  Direct  Primary  in  Minnesota,  Outlook,  May,  1809,  p.  150. 

^  For  complete  text  of  the  Minnesota  law,  see  Appendix. 

3  The  HiAmepin  county  law  of  1899  was  confined  to  nominations  for  all  elective 
positions  voted  for  wholly  within  the  county,  and  included  judicial,  congres- 
sional, legislative,  county  and  city  offices. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Minnesota.  217 

total  vote  polled  at  the  last  preceding  election,  for  the 
leading  candidates  in  their  respective  ranks,  and  to  those 
which  present  petitions  signed  by  at  least  ten  per  cent, 
of  all  the  voters  of  the  county,  asking  that  they  be 
granted  the  benefits  of  the  law.  All  such  parties  may 
not  make  nominations  for  any  office  by  petition. 

Section  3.  The  primary  election  districts  are  to  be  co- 
extensive with  those  determined  for  general  elections, 
and  are  to  be  defined  at  least  two  weeks  prior  to  the 
primary  election  by  those  ofiicers  upon  whom  this  duty 
rests  under  the  general  election  laws. 

Section  4.  Any  person  who  desires  to  be  voted  for  as 
a  candidate  at  the  primary  election  may  have  his  name 
placed  upon  the  ballot  by  filing  an  affidavit  with  the 
proper  officers  to  the  effect  that  it  is  hona  fide  his  in- 
tention to  run  for  the  nomination  for  any  specified  office, 
and  by  paying  to  the  secretary  of  state  the  sum  of  twenty 
dollars,  if  the  office  is  to  be  voted  for  in  more  than  one 
county,  and  ten  dollars  for  any  office  to  be  voted  for 
entirely  within  a  county.  The  fees  paid  under  this  pro- 
vision are  turned  into  the  state,  county,  or  city  treasury, 
according  as  the  office  is  voted  for  in  a  district,  county, 
or  citv.^ 

Section  5.  j.\t  least  nineteen  days  before  the  primary 
election,  the  secretary  of  state  must  certify  to  the  var- 
ious county  auditors  all  the  names  of  candidates  for 
office  filed  with  him,  and  to    be    voted  for  within  the 

'  Section  4  of  the  law  of  1899  required  the  filing  of  an  afHdavit  but  eleven  days 
before  the  primary  election;  the  presentation  of  a  petition  signed  by  a  number 
equal  to  at  least  5  per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  cast  for  the  candidate  of  the  party 
■with  which  he  aftiliates,  for  the  same  position,  at  the  last  general  election;  and 
the  payment  of  a  uniform  sum  of  ten  dollars. 


218  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

counties.  These  names,  and  all  others  filed  with  the 
county  auditors,  must  he  grouped  by  them  under  the 
proper  parties  at  least  fourteen  days  prior  to  the  primary 
election,  and  must  immediately  he  printed  upon  separate 
party  ballots  and  published.  The  groups  of  candidates 
are  to  be  arranged  in  the  following  order:  judicial,  con- 
gressional, legislative,  county,  and  city.  ^ 

Section  6.  The  names  of  candidates  for  each  office  are 
to  be  arranged  alphabetically  according  to  surnames. 

Section  7.  The  notice  of  a  primary  election  must  be 
given  in  accordance  with  the  general  election  laws,  and 
the  place  of  holding  the  same  is  to  be  the  place  of  regis- 
tration, or  the  place  where  the  last  election  was  held. 

Section  8.  The  judges  and  clerks  of  the  general  elec- 
tion, who  also  act  in  the  capacity  of  a  board  of  registra- 
tion, are  to  be  the  primary  election  officers  as  well.  They 
are  empowered  to  appoint  additional  clerks,  who  are  to 
receive  no  pay  unless  it  appears  that  their  aid  was 
necessary. 

Section  .9.  Although  the  judges  and  clerks  of  election 
act  in  a  double  capacity,  they  are  entitled  to  receive  only 
single  pay. 

Section  10.  ^o  voter  can  register  on  primary  election 
day  without  personally  rppearing  before  the  board  of 
registration. 

Section  11.  At  least  nine  days  before  the  primary 
election,  the  secretary  of  state  must  forward  copies  of 
this  law  to  the  county  auditors  for  use  in  the  counties. 

'  Section  6  of  the  law  of  1899,  under  which  no  names  were  filed  with  the  secre- 
tary of  state,  provided  that  the  county  auditor  was  to  group  the  candidates  and 
to  prepare  sample  ballots  at  least  ten  days  before  the  primary. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Minnesota.  219 

Section  12.  All  saloons  must  be  closed  on  primary 
election  day. 

Section  13.  -The  general  election  laws  govern  in  ttie 
arrangements  at  polling  places,  the  ballot  boxes,  bootlis, 
officers,  etc.,  except  that  there  is  to  be  no  more  than  one 
ballot  box  for  men  and  one  for  women. 

Section  14.  Supplies  are  furnished  under  the  general 
election  laws. 

Section  15.  Polls  are  to  be  open  from  six  o'clock  in 
the  morning  until  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening.  Any 
qualified  electors  present  at  the  time  of  closing  are  to  be 
allowed  a  reasonable  time  in  which  to  cast  their  ballots. 

Section  16.  Eegistration  and  a  declaration  of  party 
affiliation  are  required  for  participation  in  the  primary. 
The  voter  is  entitled  to  receive  the  ballot  of  the  party 
with  which  he  declares  (under  oath,  in  case  he  is  chal- 
lenged) that  he  affiliates,  and  whose  candidates  he  gen- 
erally supported  at  the  last  general  election,  and  with 
which  he  proposes  to  affiliate  at  the  next  election.-^  A 
first  voter  is,  however,  not  required  to  declare  his  past 
political  affiliations.^ 

Section  17.  After  having  received  the  proper  ballot, 
the  voter  is  to  retire  into  the  secrecy  of  the  booth  and 
there  cast  his  vote  as  he  sees  fit. 

Section  18.  The  ballot  is  then  to  be  folded  so  as  to 
conceal  its  face  and  to  display  the  initials  of  the  judges, 
and  returned  to  the  judge  who  deposits  it  in  the  proper 

•  For  constitutional  aspects  of  this  test,  see  Part  III,  ch.  X. 

'  Section  16  of  the  law  of  1899  established  the  open  primary  system  under 
which  the  duly-registered  voter  received  the  ballots  of  all  parties  pinned  to- 
gether, without  any  question  as  to  his  party  afSliations,  and  with  the  privilege 
of  voting  the  ticket  of  any  one  party. 


220  Direct  Pi'imary  Legislation. 

ballot  box,  after  wbich  tbe  voter's  name  is  checked  off 
upon  the  register. 

Section  19.  Before  beginning  the  canvass,  the  judges 
and  clerks  are  required  to  make  and  sign  a  statement 
indicating  the  total  number  of  persons  who  registered, 
as  well  as  the  number  of  ballots  cast  bj  men  and  by 
Avomen  respectively. 

Sction  20.  After  the  ballots  have  been  sorted  by  par- 
ties and  the  count  of  all  candidates  is  completed,  they 
are  returned  to  the  ballot  boxes  while  still  fastened  to- 
gether in  proper  bunches.  Certified  returns  are  trans- 
mitted to  the  county  auditor.  The  general  election  laws 
are  made  applicable  to  the  canvass  of  votes  as  far  as  ex- 
pedient.^ 

Section  21.  Two  tally  sheets  for  each  party,  contain- 
ing the  names  of  the  candidates  in  the  order  in  which 
they  appear  on  the  ofiicial  ballot,  are  to  be  furnished  by 
the  county  auditor. 

Section  22.  The  general  election  laws  govern  in  the 
making  of  returns. 

Section  23.  The  county  canvassing  board  is  to  be  com- 
posed of  the  clerk  of  the  district  court,  the  county  au- 
ditor, the  chairman  of  the  board  of  county  commis- 
sioners, and  two  justices  of  the  peace  of  the  same 
county,  of  opposite  political  parties  from  that  of  the 
majority  of  the  other  members  of  the  board,  who,  if 
possible,  are  to  be  selected  by  the  judge  or  judges  of  the 


'  Under  the  law  of  1899,  it  was  necessary,  before  beginning  the  canvass,  to  see 
whether  the  voters  had  in  each  case  returned  all  the  ballots.  In  case  more 
than  one  ticket  was  marked,  only  the  one  containing  the  largest  number  of 
marks  was  to  be  accepted;  or  if  the  same  nmnber  of  marks  were  found  on  sev- 
eral tickets,  all  of  them  were  to  be  rejected. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Minnesota.  221 

district  court,  ^o  candidate  is  eligible  to  a  place  on 
the  board,  and  any  vacancy  whicb  may  occur  by  reason 
of  ineligibility  is  to  be  filled  by  the  district  judge.^ 
Three  members  of  the  board  are  to  constitute  a  quorum. 
The  canvass  is  to  begin  at  once,  even  though  all  returns 
are  not  in,  and  must  be  completed  by  the  evening  of  the 
third  succeeding  day  of  the  primary.^ 

Section  24.  The  following  statements  must  be  made 
by  the  canvassing  board :  ( 1 )  Separate  statements  as 
to  each  party  containing  the  names  of  all  candidates 
voted  for  and  the  number  of  votes  cast  for  each;  (2) 
separate  statements  as  to  each  party,  giving  the  names 
of  the  successful  candidates;  (3)  a  statement  of  the 
whole  number  of  electors  registered  and  the  number  of 
ballots  cast,  male  and  female,  separately,  at  the  primary 
election. 

Ties  are  to  be  determined  by  the  canvassing  board  by 
lot.  After  the  completion  of  the  canvass,  the  county 
auditor  must  officially  notify  all  successful  candidates 
of  their  nomination,  and  certify  to  the  secretary  of  state 
on  or  before  ten  o'clock  of  the  fourth  succeeding  day  of 
the  primai'y  election,  all  returns  as  to  the  candidates 
who  were  voted  for  in  more  than  one  county.  The 
officers  who  canvass  the  general  election  returns  which 
are  made  to  the  secretary  of  state,  are  also  to  canvass 
the  returns  sent  in  by  the  county  auditors.  After  the 
completion  of  the  canvass,  the  secretary  of  state  is  re- 
quired to  officially  notify  the  successful  candidates  of 

'  These  provisions  were  not  found  in  section  33  of  the  law  of  1899. 
*  These  provisions  were  not  found  in  section  33  of  the  law  of  1899. 


222  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

their  nomination,  and  to  send  their  names  to  the  county 
auditors.^ 

Section  25.  All  candidates  who  have  been  duly 
nominated  under  this  law  may  have  their  names  placed 
upon  the  general  election  ballot,  provided  they  pay  the 
further  fee  which  is  required. 

Section  26.  All  expenses  incurred  under  this  law  are 
to  be  defrayed  in  the  same  manner  as  those  which  are 
incurred  under  the  general  election  laws. 

Section  27.  Whenever  any  error  or  omission  has  oc- 
^curred,  or  is  about  to  occur,  in  the  conduct  of  the 
primary,  the  same  shall  be  corrected  or  prevented  by  or- 
der of  a  supreme  or  district  court  judge,  to  whom  affi- 
davit has  been  made  to  this  effect,  ^dominations  may  be 
contested  within  five  days  after  the  completion  of  the 
canvass. 

Section  28.  All  provisions  of  the  general  election  laws 
respecting  offenses  and  their  punishment,  are  made  ap- 
plicable to  the  primary  elections. 

The  original  bill  as  introduced  differed  from  this  law 
as  outlined  in  some  important  respects.  It  was  more 
comprehensive  in  scope,  including  as  it  did  nominations 
for  state  offices;  and  it  incorporated  the  open  primary 
system  which  seems  to  bave  operated  successfully  under 
the  Hennepin  county  act.  Probably  the  most  severe 
struggle  was  encountered  over  the  provision  relating  to 
state  officers.  The  Senate  used  all  its  influence  to  in- 
clude them  rnder  the  law,  but  the  House  threatened  to 
kill"  the  bill  in  that  event,  upon  the  ground  that  since 


li 


'  Since  under  the  law  of  1899  no  returns  were  canvassed  outside  of  the  county, 
this  saction  required  an  amendment. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Minnesota.  223 

these  officers  are  voted  for  in  every  county  tlirougliout 
the  State  it  was  believed  that  undue  influence  would  be 
given  to  every  large  city,  with  the  result  that  "St.  Paul, 
Duluth,  and  every  other  city,  excepting  Minneapolis, 
would  have  to  remain  under  the  control  of  self-con- 
stituted oligarchies."  The  "machine"  elements  in  the 
Senate,  it  appears,  saw  the  strength  of  the  situation,  and, 
although  unsuccessful,  made  a  desperate  effort  to  incor- 
porate the  provision  in  the  hope  that  the  bill  could  then 
be  defeated. 

The  substitution  of  the  closed  primary  system  through 
the  requirement  of  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation 
seems  to  have  met  with  considerable  objection  from 
some  of  the  most  enthusiastic  supporters  of  the  bill.^ 
While  the  law  is  generally  conceded  to  be  a  decided  im- 
provement over  its  predecessor,  there  are  those,  even 
among  its  friends,  who  do  not  hesitate  to  declare  that  "it 
retrogrades  in  one  thing — in  the  imposition  of  a  test  by 
which  the  ballot  is  made  public."  It  is  stated  that 
"ringsters"  in  the  Assembly  instigated  the  change  under 
the  catch  cry,  "make  every  man  show  his  colors."  It 
will  be  seen  that  by  compelling  him  to  do  so,  politicians 
are  enabled  to  exercise  a  direct  influence  upon  the  voter, 
whereby  he  may  lose  the  freedom  of  the  ballot,  and  may 
become  the  servile  instrument  of  the  political  "boss."  ^ 

During  the  progress  of  the  discussion  on  a  test,  an 
amendment  was  urged  providing  that  every  man  ask  and 
be  given  a  single  ticket  without  any  questioning  respect- 

'  In  Wisconsin  exactly  the  reverse  occurred.  The  original  Stevens  bill  incor- 
porated the  closed  primary,  which  was  replaced  by  the  open  primary  in  the 
committee  rooms. 

'  See  Part  m,  ch.  IX 


224  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

ing  his  party  affiliations.^  This,  it  will  be  seen,  was  a 
slight  modification  of  the  open  primary  system  under 
which  the  voter  receives  the  tickets  of  all  parties,  either 
pinned  together  or  printed  in  one  sheet.  It  was,  how- 
ever, rejected  upon  the  ground  that  it  entirely  elimin- 
ated the  right  of  challenge,  whereby  a  party  can  protect 
its  own  ticket  from  the  assaults  of  an  opposing  party 
under  closed  primaries,  and  at  the  same  time  failed  to 
secure  the  secrecy  of  the  ballot  which  is  the  cardinal 
virtue  of  the  open  primary  system.^  Another  important 
deviation  from  the  Hennepin  county  law  is  found  in  the 
abolition  of  the  nomination  paper  signed  by  a  specified 
number  of  voters,  and  the  substitution  therefor  of  a 
simple  fee  and  an  affidavit,  as  a  qualification  for  a  place 
upon  the  primary  election  ballot. 

The  Minnesota  law  differs  in  a  very  important  par- 
ticular from  all  of  the  direct  primary  laws  of  a  wider 
scope  which  have  been  enacted  or  proposed,  in  that  it 
makes  absolutely  no  provision  for  the  maintenance  of 
party  organization  by  designating  some  means  whereby 
party  -committeemen  are  to  be  selected.^  One  of  the 
staunchest  adherents  and  f  ramers  of  direct  primary  leg- 
islation in  Minnesota,  says  that  "it  is  a  bad  plan"  to 
make  provision  for  the  selection  of  party  committeemen 
in  direct  primary  laws.     "Party  organization  should  be 

'  The  Ives  amendment. 

*  Should  voting  machines  be  employed  under  the  open  primary  system,  they 
could  be  so  geared  as  to  make  it  impossible  for  a  voter  to  cast  his  ballot  for  any 
candidates  but  those  upon  some  one  ticket  which  he  might  select.  This  would 
most  effectively  guard  against  "  trading  "  and  "  ward-scheming  "  by  the  minor- 
ity party,  which  is  generally  resorted  to  wherever  "splitting  "  of  tickets  is  al- 
lowed. 

»  This  feature  found  a  most  thorough  incorporation  in  the  Stevens  bill  of  Wis- 
consin, as  well  as  in  the  Morgan  law  of  Oregon. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Minnesota.  225 

left  to-eacli  party  by  itself,  and  the  party  that  can  ttink 
of  the  best  plan  deserves  the  benefit  of  it."  ^  Under  the 
Hennepin  county  law  of  1899,  the  Republican  party 
used  the  following  simple  plan :  By  party  rule=i  it  was 
provided  that  when  presidential  caucuses  were  held,  the 
delegates  were  to  select  their  party  committeemen.  One 
county  committee  was  selected  which  took  the  place  of 
the  various  judicial,  congressional,  county,  city  and 
county  committees.  It  was  found  that  much  better 
work  was  done  with  one  central  committee,  and  less 
money  needlessly  expended  than  under  the  previous  sys- 
tem. While  this  scheme  may  continue  to  work  satisfac- 
torily there  is  no  good  reason  why  the  selection  of  com- 
mitteemen should  be  left  to  the  "party"  under  party 
rules,  while  its  candidates  are  chosen  under  law.  It 
would  be  no  great  inconvenience  to  the  voter  to  select 
his  own  party  officers,  while  the  possibility  of  "machine" 
influence  in  their  choice  would  be  largely  eliminated. 

'  Oscar  F.  G.  Day,  in  Minnesota  primary  election  pamphlet,  1900. 
15 


CHAPTER  X. 

DIRECT  PRIMARIES  IN  OREGON  AND  MICHIGAN. 

Oregon. 

The  last  legislature  of  Oregon  made  an  effort  to  place 
that  State  among  the  leaders  in  direct  primary  reform  by 
enacting  two  laws  on  successive  days.  The  first  act 
passed  regulates  the  selection  of  delegates  only,  and  is 
compulsory  in  cities  having  a  population  of  10,000  or 
over.  The  second  act,  known  as  the  Morgan  law,  which 
has  since  its  passage  been  declared  unconstitutional,  was 
compulsory  in  counties  of  50,000  inliabitants  and  over, 
and  abolished  all  conventions  in  such  counties.  Portland 
is  the  only  city  having  above  10,000  inhabitants,  and 
]\[ultnomali  county,  in  which  Portland  is  located,  the 
only  county  containing  a  population  of  over  50^000. 
Hence,  the  two  laws  woidd  apparently  have  conflicted, 
but  the  earlier  act  was  so  framed  as  not  to  interfere 
with  the  direct  primary  law  proper,  and  would  have 
been  entirely  inoperative,  save  as  to  parties  of  less 
strength  than  ten  per  cent,  of  tlie  vote  of  the  city,  while 
the  direct  primary  law  would  have  obtained  for  all 
other  parties.  Originally  the  direct  primary  bill  ap- 
plied to  the  entire  State,  but  as  finally  passed  it  included 
only  nominations  for  local  judiciary,  county,  city,  pre- 
cinct, and  party  officers  in  Multnomah  county. 

Oregon  passed  its  first  primary  election  law  in  1891.^ 

>  Session  Laws  of  Oregon,  1891,  p.  4. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Oregon.  22V 

It  rcgnlcatcd  the  mctliod  of  selecting  delegatxis,  and  ap- 
plied only  to  cities  containing  a  population  of  25,000 
or  more.  General  election  qualifications  were  required 
for  voting,  and  upon  challenge  it  was  necessary  to  answer 
successfully,  and  under  oath,  all  questions  put  as  to  the 
right  to  vote.  Under  party  rules,  a  declaration  of  party 
affiliation  was  required.  The  act  contained  regula- 
tions respecting  notices,  penalties  for  corrupt  practices, 
outlined  the  duties  of  the  primary  election  officers,  and, 
where  expedient  extended  the  general  election  laws  to 
the  primaries. 

On  February  21,  1901,  the  Lockwood  act  was  passed, 
applying  to  the  primary  election  of  delegates  to  conven- 
tions in  cities  having  a  population  of  more  than  10,000 
inhabitants.  The  county  clerk  designates  a  primary 
day,  which  must  not  be  less  than  sixty  days  before  the 
holding  of  the  general  election.  He  also  has  a  notice 
served  on  the  general  election  judges  and  clerks  to  act 
as  primary  election  officers.  Any  political  party  that 
is  allowed  to  vote  its  own  ticket  at  the  general  election, 
may  participate  in  the  primary;  but  it  must,  at  least 
seven  days  prior  to  the  primary,  publish  a  notice  of  the 
holding  of  a  convention,  stating  the  date,  purposes,  num- 
ber and  apportionment  of  delegates,  etc.  Any  time  prior 
to  four  days  before  the  primary  day,  the  various  parties 
may  propose  lists  of  delegates  to  be  voted  for,  which 
are  to  be  known  as  "regular  tickets."  A  splendid  oppor- 
tunity is  given  to  "independent  movements"  by  allow- 
ing any  ten  or  more  members  of  the  same  political  party, 
who  reside  in  the  same  precinct  or  ward,  to  propose 
another  list  of  delegates  at  any  time  within  two  days 
preceding  the  primary  election,  to  be  known  as  an  "in- 


228  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

dependent  ticket."  If  there  be  a  number  of  siicb  tickets, 
tbey  are  to  be  distinguished  from  each  other  by  serial 
numbering,  one,  two,  etc.,  in  the  order  in  which  they 
are  filed.  Official  ballots  are  furnished,  which  are  sepa- 
rate for  each  party,  and  also  separate  for  the  "regular" 
and  "independent"  tickets  within  each  party,  if  there  be 
such.  Each  class  of  tickets  has  its  own  ballot  box.  The 
general  election  officers  act  under  oath,  and  possess  their 
regular  powers.  The  polls  are  open  from  eight  o'clock 
in  the  morning  to  six  o'clock  in  the  afternoon. 

A  strong  point  in  the  law  is  the  excellent  provision 
made  against  fraudulent  participation  in  the  election 
by  members  of  opposing  political  parties.  Party  regis- 
tration is  required ;  and  if  not  registered  and  challenged, 
the  voter  must  prove  his  qualifications  under  the  general 
election  laws  as  well  as  his  party  affiliations,  and  as  a 
final  test  must,  under  oath,  declare  that  he  voted  for  a 
majority  of  the  party's  candidates  whose  ticket  he  now 
desires  to  vote,  at  the  last  general  election,  or  that  he  in- 
tends to  do  so  at  the  next  general  election.  The  pro- 
vision makes  way  for  the  voter  who  was  naturalized  since 
the  last  election,  and  for  minors  come  of  age,  as  well  as 
for  those  who  have  changed  their  party  affiliations,  or 
who  failed  to  vote  at  the  last  election  for  one  reason  or 
another. 

When  the  voter  steps  up  to  cast  his  ballot,  he  states 
his  name  and  residence.  The  first  clerk  then  announces 
his  party  affiliations  on  the  basis  of  the  registration  rec- 
ords, enters  the  name,  residence,  and  party  in  the  poll 
books,  and  writes  the  name  and  number  of  the  voter  upon 
each  of  the  two  stubs  found  on  the  upper  corners  of  the 
ballots.  One  stub  is  then  removed,  and  the  ballot  with  the 


Direct  Primaries  in  Oregon.  229 

remaining  stub  still  attached  to  it,  is  handed  to  the 
voter.  The  detached  stub  is  then  passed  to  the  judge, 
and  finally  to  the  second  clerk,  who  immediately  enters 
the  name  and  number  in  the  poll  books  of  the  proper 
political  party.  The  voter  returns  the  marked  ballot 
to  the  chairman,  who  again  announces  the  name,  resi- 
dence, and  party,  removes  the  remaining  stub,  and 
passes  it  to  the  second  clerk,  who  compares  it  with  the 
counterpart  to  see  if  the  ballot  returned  is  the  identical 
official  ballot  which  was  received.  The  chairman  then 
casts  the  ballot  into  the  proper  party  box  without  dis- 
closing any  marks  or  writings  that  have  been  placed 
upon  it.  The  returning  board  is  composed  of  the  county 
clerk  and  two  justices  of  the  peace  "taken  to  his  assist- 
ance," and  begins  its  duties  the  day  following  the  pri- 
mary. Those  persons  receiving  the  highest  number  of 
votes  are  the  representatives  of  the  parties  in  the  con- 
ventions. 

The  maintenance  of  party  organization  is  also  pro- 
vided for  in  the  act  by  vesting  in  the  convention  of  dele- 
gates chosen  under  this  law,  the  power  of  electing  one 
committeeman  for  each  precinct  or  district.  The  com- 
mitteemen thus  elected  in  the  counties  are  to  constitute 
the  county  central  committee,  and  in  cities  they  are  to 
be  the  representatives  of  the  party  on  all  ward  or  sub- 
division committees.  The  term  of  office  is  two  years, 
and  all  vacancies  are  filled  by  the  remaining  members, 
who  also  have  the  power  to  make  all  party  rules  not  in- 
consistent with  this  law ;  to  make  nominations  in  case  of 
vacancies ;  to  elect  a  chairman,  secretary,  and  executive 
sub-committees ;  and  to  apportion  the  delegates  to  county 
or  lower  conventions  in  accordance  with  the  party  vote 


230  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

at  the  last  preceding  election  for  president  or  governor, 
npon  a  ratio  determined  by  the  conunittee. 

On  the  next  day,  after  the  passage  of  the  Lockwood 
act,  the  legislature  enacted  the  unconstitntional  Mor- 
gan law  ^  making  the  holding  of  direct  primaries  com- 
pulsory in  counties  having  a  population  of  50,000  or 
over,  and  optional  in  all  other  counties,  for  the  nomina- 
tion of  candidates  for  district,  county,  municipal,  pre- 
cinct, and  all  other  public  offices  to  be  voted  for  entirely 
within  the  confines  of  the  county;  for  the  adoption  of 
party  principles  and  policies,  and  rules  of  party  govern- 
ment; for  the  election  of  party  officers,  managers,  and 
committeemen ;  and  for  the  election  of  delegates  to  con- 
ventions. In  brief,  it  governed  political  parties  in  all 
their  operations,  and  in  the  performance  of  all  their 
functions.  It  applied  to  all  parties  which  had  cast  at 
least  ten  per  cent,  of  the  entire  vote  at  the  last  general 
election,  or  which  presented  petitions  signed  by  that 
number  of  voters.  It  punished  by  fine  any  action  of  a  po- 
litical party  inconsistent  with  the  act,  and  likewise  made 
unlawful  the  "promoting,  publishing,  repealing,  or  rep- 
resenting of  any  plan,  system,  or  rule  of  organization, 
or  constitution,  or  any  rule  or  regulation,  or  any  declara- 
tion of  party  policy  or  principle,"  which  had  been  adopt- 
ed subsequent  to  the  first  primary  without  being  reaf- 
firmed in  that  primary.  The  term  of  office  of  party  of- 
ficers was  limited  to  four  years,  but  might  be  made 
shorter. 

All  names  of  candidates  and  propositions,  party  rules, 
etc.,  which  were  to  be  printed  on  the  ballots,  were  to  be 

•  Session  Laws  of  Oregon,  1901,  p.  40, 


Direct  Primaries  in  Oregon.  231 

presented  on  petition  of  individual  members  of  the  partv, 
the  signatures  to  number  at  least  five  per  cent,  of  the  vote 
cast  in  the  particular  election  district  bj  the  party  for 
that  candidate  who  received  its  highest  vote.  These  pe- 
titions were  practically  the  same  as  those  now  used  to 
make  independent  nominations.  All  petitions  were  to 
be  filed  with  the  county  clerk,  or  the  clerk  of  the  county 
court,  whether  they  pertained  to  county  or  city  or  other 
offices.  The  county  clerk  was  to  perform  all  duties  with 
reference  to  making  up  the  ballots,  etc.,  as  he  does  under 
the  general  election  law.  With  all  petitions  presenting 
the  names  to  be  printed  on  the  ballot,  a  fee  of  ten  dol- 
lars was  to  be  deposited,  the  same  going  to  the  general 
fund  of  the  county.  No  fee  was  required  in  case  of  other 
petitions  presenting  resolutions  to  be  voted  on.  Signers 
of  petitions  were  to  be  qualified  electors  in  the  election 
district  for  which  the  petition  was  presented,  and  they 
were  to  be  residents  of  different  parts  of  the  district, 
so  that  at  least  each  of  one-half  of  the  precincts  thereof 
would  be  represented  by  signatures  in  such  number  as 
bore  the  same  ratio  to  the  whole  number  of  signatures 
thereon  as  did  the  number  of  votes  cast  by  the  party  in 
the  precinct  bear  to  the  number  of  votes  cast  by  the 
party  in  the  election  district  for  which  the  petition  was 
presented.  For  instance,  suppose  that  a  certain  party 
had  polled  10,000  votes  of  the  county  at  the  last  election 
for  its  candidate  receiving  the  highest  vote.  Five  hun- 
dred signatures  would  have  been  required  upon  a  peti- 
tion presenting  a  name  to  be  printed  on  the  ballot.  There 
being  one  hundred  precincts  within  the  county,  it  would 
liave  been  necessary  to  gather  these  signatures  from  at 
least  fifty  precincts.    If  one  of  these  precincts  had  polled 


232  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

two  hundred  votes,  or  one-fiftieth  of  the  party  vote  of  the 
county,  then  ten  or  one-fiftieth  of  the  signatures  on  the 
petition  would  have  heen  required  from  that  precinct,  the 
other  forty-nine  precincts  being  represented  on  the  same 
basis.  The  other  signatures  to  the  petition  might  have 
come  from  the  same  precincts  or  from  any  other  pre- 
cincts, or  from  any  one  precinct  In  case  of  changes 
in  the  precincts  or  districts,  an  approximation  was  to 
be  made  under  the  law  so  as  to  conform  to  this  feature 
as  near  as  might  be.  Signatures  were  allowed  on  dif- 
ferent papers,  but  otherwise  each  paper  was  to  have  all 
the  requisites  of  a  complete  petition.  Two  signers  were 
to  take  oath,  and  the  certificate  of  the  oath  was  to  ap- 
pear on  the  petition,  that  the  statements  in  the  petition 
were  true;  that  it  was  signed  by  qualified  persons  who 
were  members  of  the  party;  that  the  signatures  were 
genuine ;  that  the  candidate  named  therein,  if  any,  was 
eligible;  in  short,  that  the  petition  complied  with  all 
the  requisites  of  the  law  as  enumerated. 

In  signing  petitions,  a  voter  was  to  act  consistently 
as  a  member  of  but  one  party,  and  he  was  to  sign  but 
one  petition  for  the  same  office,  and  one  petition  pre- 
senting a  resolution  on  the  same  point.  ISTo  person  was 
to  be  a  candidate  for  nomination  to  more  than  one  pub- 
lic office,  but  he  was  free  at  the  same  time  to  be  a  candi- 
date for  a  party  office  or  delegate,  or  the  candidate  of 
different  parties  for  the  same  public  office.  All  petitions 
were  to  have  at  their  head  a  warning,  stating  the  penalty 
for  a  violation  of  the  law  in  signing  the  same.  The  of- 
ficer whose  duty  it  was  to  receive  petitions  for  the  pre- 
sentation of  candidates  for  nomination  at  the  primaries, 
was  also  to  receive  petitions  of  regular  nomination  for 


Direct  Primaries  in,  Oregon.  233 

office  or  for  delegates  to  convention  when  tlie  party  au- 
thority certified  under  oath  that  under  the  rules  of  the 
party  and  under  the  provisions  of  the  law,  such  of- 
ficers or  delegates  were  to  be  chosen  at  their  next  pri- 
mary election.  Should  the  party  committee  fail  to  make 
the  required  certification  within  sixty  days  before  pri- 
mary day,  twenty  days  were  to  be  allowed  to  the  indi- 
vidual members  of  the  party  to  present  a  certificate  over 
the  signatures  of  party  men  equal  in  number  to  that 
required  for  petitions.  Provision  was  made  for  the  elec- 
tion of  delegates  to  those  conventions  which  were  held 
to  make  nominations  to  those  offices  which  were  not  in- 
cluded under  the  law. 

In  tlie  matter  of  the  extension  of  the  general  election 
laws  to  the  primaries,  the  Oregon  law  was  one  of  the 
most  perfect  of  all  direct  primary  laws.  It  enumerated 
in  detail  all  the  provisions  that  were  to  apply,  and  with 
scrupulous  care  in  the  wording,  precluded  all  possibility, 
it  seems,  of  a  question  as  to  the  intention  of  application, 
provision  was  also  made  that  any  amendment  of  the 
Australian  ballot  law  was  to  work  the  same  change  in 
the  primary  law.  The  polls  were  to  be  open  from  eight 
o'clock  in  the  morning  to  six  o'clock  in  the  evening.  In 
order  to  participate  in  a  primary  election  it  was  neces- 
sary to  be  qualified  as  a  voter  under  the  general  election 
laws,  and  to  be  duly  registered  in  accordance  with  the 
registration  laws.  Registration  might  be  completed  on 
primary  election  day.  At  the  polls  all  affairs  were  to 
proceed  as  at  the  general  election,  save  in  respect  to  some 
features  necessarily  peculiar  to  the  primary  election. 
The  tickets  of  all  parties  were  to  be  arranged  on  the  same 
ballot,  one  column  on  the  ballot  being  given  each  party. 


23i  Direct  Primary  Lcghlation. 

The  candidates'  names  were  to  appear  but  once  in  each 
column,  and  were  arranged  alphabetically  by  surnames. 
Then  followed  the  delegates  to  the  different  conventions, 
the  party  officials,  and  finally,  at  the  bottom,  the  propo- 
sitions. 

After  having  received  a  ballot,  the  voter  selected  the 
column  of  his  party  and  then  proceeded  to  mark  his 
ballot,  the  same  as  in  general  elections.-^  If  he  marked 
in  more  than  one  column  he  was  counted  as  having  voted 
in  that  column  in  which  he  had  marked  the  most  votes, 
and  if  he  marked  no  more  votes  in  one  column  than  in 
any  other,  his  entire  ballot  was  rejected.  Blank  spaces 
were  left  in  which  names  might  be  written,  so  that  the 
voter  was  not  confined  to  the  names  printed  on  the  bal- 
lot. He  had  the  most  perfect  liberty,  if  he  acted  as  a 
Republican,  to  say  who  should  be  the  Republican  nomi- 
nee for  any  office,  but  he  could  not  say  that  any  par- 
ticular person  w^as  to  be  the  nominee  of  the  Democratic 
party  for  any  office.  If,  however,  he  wished  to  vote  for 
any  particular  Democrat,  he  could  only  do  so  by  com- 
pletely forsaking  his  own  party  and  foregoing  his  entire 
right  to  vote  for  any  or  all  of  the  Republican  candidates. 
This  provision  established  what  is  known  as  the  open 
primary  system,  such  as  was  incorporated  in  the  Henne- 
pin county  (Minnesota)  law  of  1899,  under  which  the 
crossing  of  party  lines  and  the  casting  of  votes  for  candi- 
dates not  of  the  voter's  party,  is  possible.  The  probability 
of  this  would  soem  to  be  very  remote,  since  it  entails  the 
loss  of  the  voter's  entire  vote  for  his  o^vn  party  to  vote 
even  for  a  single  candidate  on  the  ballot  of  any  other 

1  For  the  method  of  handling  and  identifying  the  ballots,  see  the  discussion  of 
the  Act  of  February  28, 1901. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Michujan.  235 

party.  ^  In  tlio  canvass  two  tally  sheets  were  required  for 
each  party  ticket,  upon  one  of  which  the  record  of  votes 
on  the  propositions  submitted,  was  kept,  while  the  rest  o£ 
the  ticket  was  recorded  on  the  other.  The  method  of 
counting  and  returning  the  votes  was  similar  to  that  em- 
bodied in  the  act  of  February  28,  1901,  which  has  al- 
ready been  discussed.  Ample  provision  was  made  for 
the  correction  of  all  possible  errors  or  omissions,  and  any 
nomination  or  election  might  be  contested  Avithin  five 
days  after  the  primary  election.  The  law  looked  to- 
Avards  economy  by  providing  that  sealed  bids  were  to 
be  received  for  printing  jobs,  and  the  furnishing  of 
supplies  and  stationery.  All  bills  were  to  be  audited, 
and  paid  out  of  the  regular  county  funds.  Part  of  these 
funds  were  provided  through  the  fees  of  ten  dollars  each 
which  were  required  for  the  filing  of  petitions  of  names. 
Fines  were  imposed  for  the  violation  of  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  law. 

The  law  as  brieflv  outlined  was  thorough  and  com- 
plcte  and  ought  to  have  yielded  good  results.  The  ad- 
verse decision  of  the  supreme  court  was  extremly  unfor- 
tunate in  that  it  removed  a  most  excellent  opportunity 
for  giving  the  direct  vote  principle  a  fair  trial  in  Oregon, 
for  the  Morgan  bill  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  best 
direct  primary  measures  presented  to  any  legislature 
during  the  last  year. 

MiCHIGATT. 

Much  attention  has  been  paid  to  primary  legislation 
in  Michigan.  The  first  act  was  passed  in  1887.  It  was 
amended  in  1893,  and  two  years  later  was  superseded 

'  See  Part  m,  ch.  X,  for  the  constitutional  aspects  of  this  provision. 


236  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

by  a  new  and  more  complete  law.  This  legislation,  how- 
ever, dealt  with  indirect  primaries,  and  retained  the 
convention  system  in  full.  The  first  expression  for  di- 
rect nomination  in  any  concrete  form  was  presented  in 
a  bill  to  the  legislature  in  1897.  The  first  fruits,  how- 
ever, of  much  labor  for  the  reform,  is  a  law  passed  by  the 
last  legislature,  establishing  direct  primaries  in  the  city 
of  Grand  Rapids. 

In  1897,  the  first  Colby  bill,  contemplating  compul- 
sory direct  primaries  throughout  the  State  for  all  ofiicers, 
was  introduced.  Opposition,  however,  was  too  strong 
at  the  time  to  permit  the  measure  to  pass.  Two  years 
later  the  legislature  was  confronted  by  a  second  Colby 
bill,  which  also  provided  for  a  compulsory  system  em- 
bracing all  offices  of  the  State.-^  This  bill  also  failed  to 
pass  the  legislature,  and  in  1901  the  third  Colby  bill 
came  up  for  consideration.^    The  hopelessness  of  secur- 

•  Under  this  bill  the  registration  and  primary  days  were  to  be  conciirrent.  As 
a  qualification  for  a  place  upon  the  primary  election  ballot,  nomination  papers, 
signed  by  500  voters  in  case  of  offices  to  be  voted  for  in  more  than  one  county, 
by  100  voters  in  case  of  city  and  county  offices,  and  by  25  voters  for  township 
and  ward  offices,  were  to  be  filed  by  candidates.  All  primaries  were  to  be  held 
on  the  same  day,  and  at  the  same  time  and  place.  Each  party  was  to  have  its 
own  ballots,  upon  which  the  names  of  the  candidates  were  arranged  in  their 
proper  groups  under  the  various  offices,  according  to  an  order  to  be  determined, 
not  alphabetically,  but  by  lot.  The  closed  primary  system  was  incorporated, 
under  which  party  enrollment  or  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation  was  required 
for  participation.  The  following  tesc  oath  was  requii-ed  of  all  those  who  had 
not  enrolled  themselves  with  some  party  the  last  preceding  primary;  who  had 
changed  their  affiliation;  or  who  had  not  voted  before:  "I  do  solemnly  swear 
that  I  am  a  member  of  the  poUtical  party,  the  ballot  of  which  I  now  seek  to 
vote,  and  am  in  sympathy  with  its  principles,  and  it  is  my  present  intention  to 
vote  on  election  day  for  the  candidates  for  whom  I  now  desire  to  vote  at  this 
primary,  if  they  are  nominated,  so  help  me  God."  The  platform  was  to  have 
been  formulated  by  a  convention  of  specially-elected  delegates,  chosen  sixty 
days  before  the  primary,  or  by  the  candidates  in  case  the  party  committee  failed 
to  direct  the  election  of  delegates. 

'  In  order  to  have  their  names  printed  upon  the  primary  election  ballot,  candi- 
dates were  required  to  file  nomination  papers  signed  by  from  25  to  100  voters, 
according  to  the  importance  of  the  office,  and  to  pay  a  fee  equivalent  to  one- 


Direct  Primaries  in  Miehigan.  237 

ing  the  enactment  of  a  comprehensive  law  seems  to  have 
been  felt,  so  that  the  bill  was  limited  in  its  operation 
to  Wayne  county  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  to 
legislative,  congressional,  judicial,  county,  city,  and 
ward  offices.  The  fight  over  primary  legislation  during 
the  last  session  of  the  Michigan  legislature  was  a  most 
desperate  one.  In  the  Assembly  the  measures  were  gen- 
erally supported,  and  several  passed  by  an  overwhelming 
vote.  The  Senate,  however,  inspired  by  "machine"  in- 
fluences, assumed  a  strong  attitude  of  defiance.  Those 
senators  who  were  afraid  to  trust  their  renomination  to 
the  direct  vote  of  their  constituents,  refused  to  commit 
political  suicide  by  supporting  the  bills,  and  so  defeated 
them  with  the  exception  of  one,  which  became  a  law, 
and  received  its  first  successful  trial  last  spring. 

This  law,  as  finally  passed,  provides  for  the  holding 
of  primary  elections  in  the  city  of  Grand  Rapids  at  least 
three  weeks  before  the  general  election,  for  the  nomina- 
tion of  all  elective  city  officers  and  all  other  elective  of- 
ficers, except  elective  members  of  school  boards,  who  are 
chosen  at  the  ensuing  election.  Any  person  who  desires  to 
try  for  a  nomination  must,  at  least  ten  days  before  the 
day  of  the  primary  election,  file  an  affidavit  with  the  city 
clerk  to  the  effect  that  it  is  his  hona  fide  present  intention 
to  run  for  the  nomination  of  any  specified  office.  In 
addition  to  this,  he  must  also  pay  the  sum  of  fifteen 

half  of  one  per  cent,  of  the  salary  and  fees  which  were  received  during  the  last 
fiscal  year  by  the  person  holding  the  ofBce  for  which  a  nomination  was  sought. 
But  the  fee  was  not  to  exceed  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars.  The  primary  elec- 
tions of  all  parties  were  to  be  held  on  the  same  day,  and  at  the  same  time  and 
place  "  as  the  first  regular  continuous  secular  day  sessions  of  the  board  of  regis- 
tration," both  in  April  and  November.  The  provisions  respecting  a  test,  and  the 
formulation  of  a  ]iarty  platform,  were  the  fame  as  those  already  explained  in 
connection  with  the  law  of  1899. 


23S  Direct  Primarrj  Legislation. 

dollars  to  the  city  clerk  in  case  lie  intends  to  nm  for 
any  office  except  that  of  a  ward,  in  wliich  case  a  fee  of 
but  five  dollars  is  required.  Separate  ballots  are  to  be 
used  by  the  different  political  parties,  upon  which  the 
names  of  the  candidates  are  arrauged  alphabetically, 
grouped  according  to  the  importance  of  the  offices  begin- 
ning with  the  judicial,  then  the  legislative,  and  finally, 
the  city  and  ward  positions  for  which  nominations  are 
to  be  made.  Sample  ballots  are  provided  for,  and  of- 
ficial ballots  may  be  distributed  only  through  the  city 
clerk. 

The  primary  elections  are  to  be  held  at  places  to  be 
designated  by  those  persons  who  perform  this  duty  in 
case  of  general  elections.  Booths,  railings,  and  gates  are 
to'  be  put  up  in  accordance  with  the  general  election 
laws.  Proper  notice  of  the  primary  election  must  be  given 
at  least  ten  days  before,  and  must  designate  the  offices  for 
which  nominations  are  to  be  made.  The  primary  elec- 
tion inspectors  are  to  be  appointed  by  the  common  coun- 
cil in  the  same  manner  as  are  the  general  election  of- 
ficers, but  two  of  the  three  members  of  each  board  must 
be  chosen  from  the  strongest  political  party.  The  one 
first  appointed  is  to  be  chairman.  Their  term  of  office 
is  fixed  at  two  years,  a"  id  their  compensation  at  two 
dollars  and  fifty  cents  per  day.  Vacancies  are  filled  by 
the  remaining  inspectors  from  among  the  electors  pres- 
ent at  the  opening  of  the  polls,  in  the  same  manner  as 
at  general  elections.  The  inspectors  are  empowered  to 
appoint  two  clerks  and  two  gatekeepers  who  serve  at  one 
dollar  and  fifty  cents  per  day.  The  polls  are  to  be  kept 
open  from  twelve  o'clock  noon  until  eight  o'clock  in  the 
evening. 


Direct  Primaries  in  Michigan.  239 

"No  voter  shall  receive  a  primary  election  ballcjt,  or 
be  entitled  to  vote,  until  lie  shall  have  first  been  duly 
registered  as  a  voter  then  and  there  in  the  manner  pro- 
vided by  law,  upon  which  registration  (unless  chal- 
lenged, and  if  challenged,  tlien  only  in  the  event  that 
the  challenge  has  been  determined  in  favor  of  the  voter) 
he  shall  be  entitled  forthwith  to  receive  the  ballot  of  the 
political  party  with  which  he  then  and  there  states  he 
is  affiliated."  Duplicate  copies  of  registration  book?  are 
to  be  made  and  preserved.  The  voter,  after  having  re- 
ceived a  ballot,  retires  into  a  booth  and  there  marks  the 
ballot  as  he  sees  fit,  and  after  having  properly  folded  it, 
returns  it  to  the  inspector  in  charge  of  the  ballot  box, 
who  deposits  it  in  the  box  of  the  proper  party. 

As  soon  as  the  polls  are  closed,  the  inspectors  must  be- 
gin a  public  canvass.  If  the  whole  number  of  ballots 
found  in  the  boxes  is  in  excess  of  the  number  of  electors 
voting,  according  to  the  poll  lists,  the  number  in  excess 
is  drawn  out  as  provided  in  the  general  election  laws. 
The  tally  sheets,  of  which  there  are  to  be  two  sets  for 
each  political  party,  are  to  be  delivered  to  the  city  clerk 
within  twenty-four  hours  after  the  close  of  the  polls. 
The  common  council  is  to  appoint  three  of  its  members, 
none  of  whom  are  candidates  for  nomination,  and  who 
represent  the  dominating  political  parties,  as  a  board  of 
canvassers.  The  members  of  this  board  are  to  receive 
three  dollars  per  day  for  their  services,  and  are  to  work 
continuously  until  the  canvass  is  completed.  TJix)n  the 
completion  of  the  canvass  proper  statements  of  the  re- 
sults must  be  filed  with  the  city  clerk.  These  state- 
ments must  be  separate  for  each  political  party,  and 
must  show  the  names  of  all  candidates  voted  for,  with 


24:0  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

the  number  of  votes  received  by  each,  and  for  wbat  of- 
fice, togetlier  with  the  names  of  the  successful  candi- 
dates and  a  statement  of  the  total  number  of  votes  cast. 
Ties  are  to  be  decided  by  the  canvassing  board  by  lot. 
Only  those  candidates  who  have  been  nominated  at  a 
primary  election  held  in  accordance  with  this  act  are 
permitted  places  upon  the  official  ballots  at  the  ensuing 
general  election.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  any  office,  the 
same  is  to  be  filled  by  the  city  campaign  party  com- 
mittee, or  if  no  such  committee  exists,  then  by  mass 
convention  of  the  party  in  which  the  vacancy  occurs. 
The  candidates  of  each  party  who  have  been  nominated 
are  to  select  the  chairman  and  the  secretary  of  their  re- 
spective city  and  legislative  campaign  committees.  It 
will  be  noticed  that  no  provision  is  made  in  this  law 
for  the  election  of  party  committeemen.  In  this  re- 
spect it  resembles  the  Minnesota  law  of  the  present  year, 
as  well  as  that  of  1899.  Otherwise,  the  Michigan  act 
is  quite  complete  and  ought  to  yield  good  results,  even 
though  it  is  of  but  local  operation. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

ENACTED  AND  PROPOSED  PRIMARY  LEGISLATION 

IN  WISCONSIN. 

Wisconsin  has  within  the  last  few  years  come  to  the 
front  in  primary  reform.  The  struggle  which  since 
1896  has  been  waging  with  ever-increasing  fierceness 
has  now  become  of  general  interest  and  significance. 
Led  by  the  most  faithful  and  able  champion  of  the  direct 
primary,  Governor  La  Follette,  it  has  grown  beyond 
the  lines  of  parties,  and  now  numbers  in  its  ranks  an 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  people  of  Wisconsin.  So 
thorough  have  been  the  campaigns,  so  persistent  has 
been  the  urging  of  specific  ideas  of  reform  upon  the 
public,  so  widely  have  these  ideas  been  circulated,  that 
press  and  platform  from  Boston  to  San  Francisco  have 
accorded  them  comment  and  eulogy,  and  the  progress 
of  direct  primaries  has  been  markedly  promoted  in  ad- 
joining States  and  throughout  the  country.  Yet,  though 
the  Commonwealth  has  been  aroused,  though  the  people 
have  spoken  in  convention  and  at  the  polls  for  this  re- 
form with  overwhelming  majorities,  their  will  has  been 
defeated,  their  mandate  ignored,  and  so  the  struggle  still 
goes  on. 

From  1890  on,  "caucus  laws"  followed  each  other  in 
rapid  succession  in  the  years  1891,^     1893,^     1895,^ 

'  Session  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1891,  ch.  249. 
»  Session  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1893,  ch.  239. 
s  Session  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1895,  ch.  288. 
16 


242  Direct  Priina7'y  Legislation. 

1897/  and  1899.^  Since  these  laws  do  not  contemplate 
direct  primaries,  but  a  continuation  of  caucuses  and 
conventions,  only  their  main  bearings  will  be  indicated. 
The  act  of  1891  applies  to  all  counties  having  a  popula- 
tion of  150,000  inhabitants  and  over,  for  all  city,  spe- 
cial, as  well  as  general  elections.^  It  did  not  apply  to 
judicial  elections  or  to  the  election  of  delegates  to  state 
conventions.  Booths,  such  as  are  used  on  general  elec- 
tion day,  were  to  be  erected,  but  no  two  parties  were 
to  hold  primaries  on  the  same  day.  ITomination  papers 
signed  by  at  least  ten  qualified  voters  were  required,  and 
a  number  of  direct  primary  provisions  were  incorpor- 
ated, which  need  not  be  dwelt  upon  here.  The  law  of 
1893  again  restored  the  original  caucus  meetings,  and 
applied  to  counties  with  200,000  inhabitants.  (Mil- 
waukee county.)  The  Mills  law  of  1895  repealed  the 
previous  act,  and  established  another  system  of  caucuses 
and  conventions  in  the  city  of  Milwaukee,  which  very 
closely  approximates  to  the  present  system.  In  the  law 
we  find  a  provision  of  a  "preliminary  meeting"  of  the 
electors  of  the  party  to  be  called  by  the  chairman  of  the 
county  committee  four  days  before  the  holding  of  the 
caucus,  to  propose  delegates  and  candidates  to  be  voted 
for  at  the  caucus.  In  1897  a  new  Mills  bill  was  enacted 
applying  to  cities  of  the  first  and  second  class.^  Candi- 
dates were  again  proposed  by  a  "preliminary  meeting," 
their  names  published    on    official    ballots,  and  voting 

'  Session  Laws  c'  Wisconsin,  1897,  ch.  312. 
»  Session  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1899,  ch.  341. 

•  Milwaukee  county  is  tlie  only  county  in  the  State  with  a  population  of  150,000 
or  over,  and  the  law  was  framed  for  that  county  as  a  local  law. 

*  Milwaukee,  La  Crosse,  Oshkosh,  Superior,  Racine,  SheVwygan,  Eau  Claire, 
Green  IJciy,  Madison,  Marinette,  Appleton,  Fond  du  Lac,  Janesyille,  Ashland, 
Wausau. 


Primary  Reform  in  Wisconsin.  243 

bootlis  used.  The  la%y  was  optional  for  the  rest  of  the 
State,  and  upon  petition  of  ten  per  cent,  of  the  voters 
of  the  city,  the  question  of  adoption  was  to  be  submitted 
to  a  vote.  If  challenged,  an  affidavit  was  required  from 
the  voter  that  he  was  duly  qualified,  and  that  he  voted 
for  the  regular  party  candidates  at  the  preceding  general 
election.  This  test  was  plainly  unfair  and  unconstitu- 
tional in  that  it  disfranchised  all  voters  who,  though 
qualified,  had  for  one  reason  or  other  failed  to  vote  at 
the  last  election ;  who  had  been  naturalized ;  or  who  had 
come  of  age  since  the  last  election. 

The  present  law,  passed  in  1899,  contains  regulations 
applicable  to  the  rest  of  the  State  outside  of  counties 
containing  200,000  inhabitants.  General  registration  is 
required  in  all  the  cities  of  the  State,  and  participa- 
tion in  more  than  one  primary  is  made  punishable.  The 
principle  of  a  direct  vote,  as  recognized  by  this  law,  is 
applied  only  in  towns,  villages,  school  districts,  and 
wards  of  cities  for  the  election  of  aldermen,  supervisors, 
and  justices  of  the  peace.  In  all  other  cases  candidates 
are  nominated  by  convention  or  by  petition,  in  accord- 
ance with  law.  The  caucus  law  of  1899  is  an  ad- 
mittedly thorough  one,  but  it  by  no  means  secures  to  all 
voters  a  fair  and  equal  voice  in  the  choice  of  candidates. 
In  Wisconsin,  as  elsewhere,  it  has  been  found  that  there 
are  certain  evils  in  our  nominating  machinery  which  no 
amount  of  caucus  legislation  can  remedy.  Such  legisla- 
tion can  improve,  and  does  improve,  but  it  cannot  cure. 
It  is  good  as  far  as  it  goes,  but  it  does  not  go  far  enough, 
because  it  leaves  the  whole  system  of  conventions,  from 
the  highest  to  the  lowest,  untouched.  With  this  con- 
viction, and  imbued  with  the  desire  to  find  some  means 


24^  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

of  overcoming  the  difficulty,  some  of  tlie  leading  puLlic- 
spirited  men  of  the  State  have  for  a  number  of  years 
been  close  students  of  the  principles  of  the  direct  pri- 
mary system  and  pioneers  in  the  field  for  this  great  re- 
form. They  have  from  time  to  time,  through  the  press, 
from  the  platform,  or  public  rostrum,  given  to  the  people 
the  best  thought  and  most  advanced  reasoning  upon  the 
subject. 

The  origin  of  the  movement  for  direct  primaries  in 
Wisconsin,  is  not  only  interesting  but  instructive.  Aa 
is  well  known,  a  majority  of  the  delegates  who  met  in 
Milwaukee  in  1896  to  nominate  the  Republican  candi- 
date for  governor  were  pledged  in  support  of  Mr. 
Robert  M.  La  FoUette.  However,  when  the  convention 
met,  it  was  found  that  the  "machine"  element  of  the 
party  had  succeeded  in  winning  over  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  La  Follette  delegates  to  place  their  candidates.^ 
So  forcible  did  this  defeat  of  the  popular  will  bring 
home  to  Mr.  La  Follette  and  his  friends  the  necessity  of 
a  complete  reform  of  our  nominating  institutions,  that  a 
resolution  was  made  then  and  there  to  devise  some  means 
whereby  the  people  of  the  State  might  have  restored  to 
them  an  effective  voice  in  the  nomination  of  public 
officers.  That  hour  was  the  birth  of  a  policy  of  active 
campaigning  in  favor  of  direct  primaries  which  in  1900 
found  its  culmination  in  the  election  of  Mr.  La  FoUette 
as  chief  executive  of  the  State. 


'  On  the  clay  hefoi-e  the  convention  met,  rumors  had  been  spread  of  the  pur- 
chase of  votes,  and  on  the  evening  of  the  same  day  representatives  of  the  "  ma- 
chine "  appeared  before  the  La  FoUette  delegation  with  information  of  the  im- 
possibility of  nominating  their  candidates,  and  suggesting  at  the  same  time  that 
it  was  to  the  interests  of  the  party,  as  well  as  themselves,  not  to  make  any  hos- 
tile display. 


Primary  Reform  in  Wisconsin.  245 

In  1897  the  first  specific  move  was  made  towards  di- 
rect primary  legislation  in  Wisconsin.  A  bill,  known  as 
the  Lewis  bill,  embodying  the  most  desirable  features  of 
the  direct  vote  system,  as  seen  by  its  promulgators,  was 
introduced  into  the  legislature.^  It  abolished  all  con- 
ventions and  provided  for  but  one  primary  to  be  held  on 
the  first  Tuesday  after  the  first  Monday  in  September  of 
every  year,  at  which  all  officers  to  be  voted  for  at  the 
fall  and  spring  elections  were  to  be  nominated.  The 
primaries  of  all  parties  were  to  be  held  on  the  same  day 
and  at  the  same  place.  Candidates  were  required  to  file 
nomination  papers  in  order  to  have  their  names  placed 
upon  the  primary  election  ballots.  Perhaps  the  most 
novel  feature  of  the  whole  bill  was  the  one-primary-a- 
year  idea,  which  can  be  defended  only  on  the  ground  of 
economy  and  greater  interest,  and  the  resultant  larger 
attendance  at  the  polls;  but  there  are  many  serious  ob- 
jections to  choosing  candidates  for  spring  elections, 
which  ought  to  be  taken  out  of  politics  as  far  as  possible, 
in  the  fall,  when  party  strife  is  keenest  and  party  feeling 
is  at  its  height. 

The  Lewis  bill  was  defeated,  but  the  fight  went  on, 
led  by  the  indomitable  spirit  of  Mr.  La  FoUette.  On 
February  22,  1897,  he  addressed  the  University  of 
Chicago  upon  "The  Menace  of  the  Machirie."  It  was  a 
discussion  of  the  principles  of  democracy,  and  an  ar- 
raignment of  the  political  "machine"  and  its  methods 
which  attracted  the  attention  and  received  the  approval 
of  leading  journalists  throughout  the  country.  In  this 
address  the  most  comprehensive  application  of  the  direct 

1  The  bill  was  drawn  by  Mr.  La  FoUette  and  the  Hon.  Samuel  A.  Harper,  and 
introduced  by  Hon.  Wm.  T.  Lewis  of  Racine. 


2i6  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

vote  system  which  had  been  suggested  by  any  one  was 
urged  and  the  essential  features  of  a  direct  primary  law 
briefly  but  clearly  outlined.^  Tn  ]\Iarch  of  the  next 
year,  1898,  Mr.  La  FoUette  delivered  a  most  inspiring 
address  before  the  University  of  Michigan,  in  which  his 
prophetic  words,  "The  fight  is  on.  It  will  continue  to 
victory.  There  will  be  no  halt,  and  no  compromise," 
voiced  the  ruling  spirit  of  the  struggle  which  was  grow- 
ing with  the  years. 

The  wide  circulation  given  to  the  La  Follette  ad- 
dresses, as  well  as  other  speeches  and  publications  upon 
the  subject  during  this  period,  added  greatly  to  the  pop- 
ularity of  the  cause  in  Wisconsin  and  in  other  States. 
"The  principle  was  then  clearly  defined,  and  the  plan 
under  which  it  could  be  accomplished  was  then  fully 
presented.  From  platform  and  pulpit,  before  agricul- 
tural societies,  good  government  clubs,  political  clubs, 
debating  societies,  in  the  schoolhouses  and  public  halls, 
wherever  men  were  gathered  together,  the  dangers  which 
threatened  representative  government  were  discussed, 

'  If  the  eminently  wise  and  practical  suggestions  as  to  how  the  "  machine  "  may 
be  stripped  of  its  power  in  our  party  politics,  which  Mr.  La  FoUette  elaborated 
in  his  address  before  the  students  of  the  University  of  Chicago,  ultimately  find 
embodiment  in  state  laws,  the  people  will  have  occasion  to  feel  grateful  that 
men  of  his  calibre  have  been  forced  into  conflict  with  "  machine "  fighters. 
Laws  based  on  the  lines  suggested  '  j  Mr.  La  Follette's  admirable  address  will 
afford  the  only  practical  relief  from  the  despotism  of  "machine "  politics.  The 
Chicago  Times-Herald,  Feb.  25,  1897. 

Mr.  La  Follette,  out  of  personal  experience  and  wide  observation,  finds  the 
weak  point  in  our  method  of  selecting  public  officers  to  be  in  our  primaries. 
We  have  adopted  the  secret  ballot  and  secured  to  the  voter  the  opportunity  to 
use  his  uncoerced  judgment  in  electing  officials,  but  we  have  done  nothing  to 
secure  to  him  an  equally  open  and  free  choice  in  the  selection  of  candidates  by 
his  party  organization.  If  his  party  is  dominated  by  a  "  boss  "  and  his  "  ma- 
chine,"'' all  that  is  left  to  any  voter  to  make  effective  protest  is  to  vote  for  the 
candidates  named  by  some  other  "boss"  and  his  "  macliine."  Evidently,  wo 
have  gone  but  half  the  distance  in  needed  reform  by  adopting  the  Australian 
method  for  election.    St.  Paul  Globe,  Nov.  4,  1897. 


Primary  Reform  in  Wisconsin.  247 

the  cause  plainly  traced  to  the  selection  of  candidates 
by  the  'bosses,'  and  the  vital  importance  of  election, 
by  the  people  by  direct  vote,  and  the  necessary  pro- 
visions of  a  primary  law,  were  fully  and  fairly  pre- 
sented. The  plan  was  so  overwhelmingly  approved  by 
the  voters  that  both  the  great  political  parties  of  the 
State,  the  Democrats  in  1898  and  the  Kepublicans  in 
1900,  adopted,  without  qualification  or  limitation,  the 
principle  of  the  nomination  of  all  candidates  by  direct 
vote  of  the  people  at  a  primary  election,  in  lieu  of  nomi- 
nations by  delegates  through  the  machinery  of  caucuses 
and  conventions."  ^  But  in  spite  of  the  strong  public 
sentiment  in  1898,  the  "machine"  again  succeeded  in 
nominating  its  candidate  for  governor.  However,  Mr. 
La  Follette  was  sufficiently  strong  in  his  party  to  force 
a  concession  from  the  "machine"  by  compelling  the 
adoption  of  a  plank  in  the  platform  "demanding  such 
legislation  as  would  secure  to  every  citizen  the  freest  ex- 
pression of  his  choice  in  the  selection  of  candidates." 

During  the  session  of  the  next  legislature  in  1899,  the 
Bryant  direct  primary  bill  was  introduced.  It  re- 
sembled in  many  of  its  features  the  Lewis  bill.  It  ap- 
plied to  the  nomination  of  state,  congressional,  legisla- 
tive, and  county  officers.  All  parties  were  to  hold  pri- 
maries on  the  same  day.  and  at  the  same  hours  and 
places.  Party  committeemen  were  to  be  selected  in  the 
different  precincts.  The  chairmen  of  such  committees 
were  to  compose  the  county  committees,  and  the  chair- 
men of  the  county  committees,  the  state  central  com- 
mittee.     For  participation   in   the   primary,    previous 

'  Governor  La  Follette's  veto  message  of  May  10, 1901. 


248  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

registration  was  required,  as  well  as  an  answer  to  the 
question:  "Which  party  do  you  desire  and  intend  to 
aflSliate  with  ?"  The  platform  was  to  be  promulgated 
by  the  state  central  committee,  and  all  expense  borne  by 
the  political  parties. 

The  Bryant  bill  met  with  a  similar  fate  as  the  Lewis 
bill.  But  there  was  "no  halt  and  no  compromise."  The 
results  of  many  years  of  persistent  agitation  could  not 
be  suppressed  much  longer.  Though  the  "machine" 
was  strong,  its  strength  lay  in  the  submissive  and  un- 
questioning voter  whom  it  had  successfully  duped. 
However,  "continued  rapping  brought  the  voter  tx)  the 
door."  He  heard,  and  saw,  and  believed  that  the  direct 
primary  would  offer  something  better,  and  in  that  be- 
lief he  came  strongly  to  the  support  of  Mr.  La  Follette 
and  the  "anti-machine"  element  of  the  Republican  party 
in  1900,  thereby  defeating  the  "machine"  and  bringing 
closer  the  day  of  direct  primaries.^ 

The  nominating  convention  which  chose  Mr.  La  Toi- 
lette as  its  candidate  in  1900  framed  a  platform  which 
contained  the  plank :  "The  great  reformations  effected 
in  our  general  elections  through  the  Australian  ballot  in- 
spire us  with  confidence  to  apply  the  same  method  in 
making  nominations,  so  that  every  voter  may  exercise 
his  sovereign  riglit  of  choice  by  direct  vote  without  the 
intervention  or  interference  of  any  political  agency.  We 
therefore  demand  that  caucuses  and  conventions  for  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  office  be  abolished  by  legis- 
lative enactment,  and  that  all  candidates  for  state,  legis- 

'  Having  been  a  close  observer  of  the  recent  eflfort  at  reform  in  Wisconsin, 
and  a  personal  witness  of  the  discussions  in  the  legislature,  the  writer  fuels  able 
to  detail  the  struggle  against  the  "  machine  "  as  generally  typical  of  what  must 
be  contended  with  in  the  prosecution  of  the  primarj'  reform. 


Prhnary  Reform  in  ^Vucoiisin.  249 

latlve,  congressional,  and  county  offices  be  nominated 
at  a  primary  election,  upon  the  same  day,  by  direct  vote, 
under  the  Australian  ballot."  The  overwhelming  vote 
cast  for  Mr.  La  Follette  at  the  ensuing  election — the 
largest  ever  cast  for  governor  in  the  State — crowned  the 
struggle  which  had  "continued  on  to  victory,"  and 
cleared  the  way  for  the  Republican  party  to  carry  out 
the  direct  primary  plank  of  its  platform.  A  law  was 
now  almost  a  certainty,  for  if  platform  planks  mean  any- 
thing, that  plank  meant  that  every  Republican  member 
of  the  legislature  was  pledged  to  vote  in  favor  of  a  direct 
primary  law  which  complied  with  the  provisions  of  the 
platform. 

When  the  legislature  met,  one  of  the  first  measures  to 
be  introduced  was  the  carefully  drawn  Stevens  direct 
primary  bill,  which  after  two  readings  went  to  the  com- 
mittee rooms.  This  bill  provided  for  the  direct  nomi- 
nation of  all  officers  of  the  State,  (except  judicial,  vil- 
lage, township,  or  school  district  officers)  who  were  not 
nominated  by  petition  in  accordance  with  the  statutes 
of  1898.  Primary  elections  were  to  be  held  at  the  regu- 
lar polling  places,  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  September, 
1902,  and  biennially  thereafter,  for  the  purpose  of 
nominating  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  the  next  general 
election.  In  case  of  spring  elections,  the  primary  was 
to  be  held  at  least  three  weeks  before  the  election.  All 
parties  were  to  hold  their  primaries  on  the  same  day,  and 
at  the  same  time  and  place,  at  public  expense,  under  the 
supervision  of  the  general  election  officers,  and  as  far  as 
possible  in  accordance  with  the  general  election  laws. 
Separate  ballots  were  to  be  provided  for  the  different 
parties,  and  no  person  was  to  be  allowed  to  vote  unless 


250  Direct  Primary  Legislation, 

he  was  duly  registered  and  affiliated  with  the  party 
whose  ticket  he  desired  to  vote.  Each  party  was  to  can- 
vass its  own  vote  through  its  party  officers.  The  state 
platform  of  each  party  was  to  he  framed  by  its  candi- 
dates for  the  state  and  legislative  offices.  The  main- 
tenance of  a  proper  and  popular  party  organization  was 
provided  through  the  biennial  selection  of  committee- 
men at  the  primaries  of  each  precinct.  The  county 
chairmen  at  their  meeting  to  canvass  the  vote  for  state 
officers  were,  in  proper  years,  to  choose  by  ballot  the  elect- 
ors of  their  party  for  president  and  vice-president, 
while  delegates  to  the  national  conventions  of  the  differ- 
ent parties  were  to  be  chosen  at  elections  held  in  April 
in  the  proper  years. 

The  Stevens  bill,  which  is  printed  in  full  in  the  ap- 
pendix, was  doubtless  the  most  carefully  wrought  out 
and  complete  bill  for  direct  primaries  yet  presented  to 
any  legislature.-*  In  the  committee  room  the  bill  was 
thoroughlv  considered  and  certain  a.mendments  made.- 
The  most  important  were:  The  substitution  of  the 
open  primary  for  a  closed  or  party  primary  by  the 
abolition  of  the  test  of  party  affiliation;  from  this  fol- 


1  This  statement  is  based  upon  a  careful  examination  of  direct  primary  bills 
introduced  into  the  legislatures  of  soni<^  eighteen  different  States  during  the  year 
1901,  as  well  as  upon  a  personal  study  of  a  number  of  bills  of  an  earlier  origin. 
In  its  legal  wording  the  Wisconsin  bill  is  a  model.  (See  Appendix.)  For  its  ex- 
cellence in  this  respect  much  credit  belongs  to  Hon.  E.  Ray  Stevens.  Besides,  it 
embodied  the  best  thoughts  and  efforts  of  a  number  of  other  able  men  who  were 
thoroughly  conversant  with  the  subject  of  their  hopes.  Its  every  section  plainly 
showed  the  marks  of  the  master  mind  of  Governor  La  Follette,  who  for  so  many 
years  has  been  an  eai  jest  student  of  the  principle  involved,  and  who,  after  hav- 
ing been  chosen  to  the  headship  of  the  State  upon  the  merits  of  that  principle, 
strove  to  give  the  people  the  best  that  could  be  had. 

'The  following  assemblyinen  were  on  the  commitee:  E.  H.  Steiger,  E.  Ray 
Stevens,  W.  W.  Andrew,  W.  J.  Middlelon,  L.  N.  Coapman,  John  A.  Henry,  J.  C. 
KareL 


Primary  Reform  in  Wisconsin.  251 

lowed  the  substitution  of  the  imited,  instead  of  separate 
ballots,  and  the  canvassing  of  the  vote  by  one  canvassing 
board  instead  of  by  separate  boards  for  each  i>arty ;  tho 
formulation  of  the  platform  by  the  state  central  com- 
mittee, or  in  such  manner  as  the  committee  saw  fit,  in- 
stead of  by  the  candidates;  the  elimination  of  the  sec- 
tions relating  to  the  primary  election  of  presidential 
electors  and  to  the  election  of  delegates  to  national  con- 
ventions ;  the  insertion  of  a  provision  for  a  non-partisan 
ticket,  and  for  the  counting  of  a  vote  for  a  candidate 
running  on  some  other  ticket,  for  that  candidate  as  a 
candidate  on  the  voter's  party  ticket.     With  these  and 
a  few  minor  changes  the  bill  went  before  the  House, 
where  it  met  with  considerable  opposition,  which,  how- 
ever, was  directed,  not  against  specific  provisions  of  the 
bill,  but  against  the  general  principle  of  direct  nomina- 
tions involved.      As  an  embodiment  of  that  principle, 
the  bill  was,  in  the  estimation  of  the  writer,  better  than 
anv  of  the  numerous  bills  studied. 

After  a  severe  struggle,  including  an  all-night  session 
in  the  course  of  which  probably  the  most  disreputable 
public  scenes  which  ever  disgraced  the  legislative  halls  of 
Wisconsin  were  enacted,^  the  bill  passed  the  Assembly 

"  The  methods  which  were  resorted  to  for  the  defeat  of  the  bill  are  a  matter 
of  public  record.  To  the  ordinary  citizen  they  must  appear  almost  incredible. 
When  the  Assembly  met  on  the  evening  of  March  19  with  the  apparent  inten- 
tion to  give  the  bill  a  fair  and  f  uU  discussion,  the  opponents  of  the  measure 
strove  to  "  kill  "  it  by  cutting  off  aU  debate  through  a  call  of  the  House,  which 
was  carried.  Four  times  in  the  course  of  the  night  the  friends  of  the  bill  at- 
tempted to  raise  the  call,  but  failed  by  from  one  to  two  votes  of  the  required 
majority  of  51.  Not  until  6:15  the  next  morning  was  the  call  suspended,  and  the 
bill  passed  by  a  vote  of  53  to  42.  Typical  of  the  reports  which  issued  from  the 
press  on  the  following  morning,  describing  the  scenes  of  the  all-night  deadlock, 
are  the  following  statements  taken  from  the  Milwaukee  News,  which  will  give 
the  reader  some  conception  of  the  character  of  the  flght  indulged  in  by  the  op- 
position.   "  The  only  member  found  (.by  the  sergeant-at-arms  in  his  search  for 


252  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

on  a  close  vote,  and  was  sent  to  the  Senate,  where  the  op- 
position was  fatal  on  another  close  vote.^  A  referendum 
clause  providing  that  the  law  was  not  to  go  into  effect 
unless  ratified  bj  a  majority  vote  at  the  polls,  was  then 
offered  by  the  friends  of  the  measure  as  an  amendment 
of  the  original  bill.  The  opposition  senators  voted  this 
do^vn.  The  supporters  of  the  measure  in  the  Senate 
then  proposed  a  compromise,  the  Hatton  amendment, 
which  included  in  its  operation  all  but  state  and  con- 
gressional offices.  This  also  was  voted  down.  The  great- 
est objection  urged  by  the  enemies  of  the  bill  as  it  was 

absentees)  was .    Mr. was  instructed  by  the  convention  which 

nominated  him  to  vote  for  a  primary  election  bUl,  and  the  charge  was  openly 

made  when was  brought  into  the  chamber,  that  opponents  of  the  bill 

were  responsible  for  his  unfortimate  condition,  the  idea  having  been  to  prevent 
him  from  appearing  in  the  Assembly  to  vote  for  the  bill.    Almost  a  scene  was 

created  once  by (an  opponent)  attempting  to  prevent  Senator 

and  other  friends  of  the  bill  from  talking  with ."    .    ,    .    "Some  of  the 

scenes  during  the  early  hours  of  the  morning  were  a  disgrace  to  the  State.  Liq- 
uor was  brought  into  the  capitol  and  several  members,  as  well  as  one  or  two 
'machine'  senators  who  remained  in  the  capitol  to  lobby  against  the  bUl,  had 
several  drinks  more  than  were  good  for  them  before  the  night  was  over.  One  of 
the  committee  rooms  was  made  a  kind  of  liquor  supply  house,  from  which  bot- 
tles containing  hquid  a  good  deal  stronger  than  milk  were  rushed  to  thirsty  mem- 
bers. Once  Speaker  Ray  was  obliged  to  caU  for  order,  because  of  the  p'-oduc- 
tion  of  beer  bottles  by  members  on  the  floor."  .  ,  .  "  The  federal  office-holders' 
lobby  remained  on  deck  all  night,  and  finally  some  of  their  members  became  so  ob- 
noxious in  their  efforts  against  the  bill  that  Assemblyman raised  a  point 

of  order,  asking  that  persons  not  entitled  to  the  privilege  of  the  floor  be  barred. 
Mr.  Ray  intunediately  ordered  all  persons  who  had  no  right  to  the  floor  to  the 
lobby."  .  .  .  "  The  assembly  floor  at  six  o'clock  this  morning  was  a  sight  to 
behold.  Just  in  front  of  the  first  tier  of  desks  was  an  empty  bottle  marked 
•Hunter's  Rye,' while  the  entire  floor  was  a  mass  of  newspapers  and  waste 
paper,"  etc.  In  short,  witnesses  of  the  all-night  session  declare  that  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  primary  election  bill  on  that  memorable  night  did  not  attack  the 
measure  upon  its  merits,  but  strove  to  accompUsh  its  defeat  by  use  of  money 
and  drink. 

'  The  Senate  Conmiittee  on  Privileges  and  Elections  was  composed  of  Hatton 
(chairman),  Jones,  Miller,  Whitehead,  and  Martin.  One  of  the  most  able  and 
earnest  speeches  made  in  behalf  of  the  bill  in  the  Senate  was  that  dehvered  by 
Senator  Stout,  his  basic  argument  being  that  he  favored  the  direct  primary  be- 
cause it  rested  upon  a  Arm  belief  in  the  wisdom,  virtue  and  honor  of  the  ordi- 
nary citizen,  which  he  heartily  indorsed. 


Primary  Heform  in  Wisconsin.  253 

passed  by  the  Assembly,  had  been  its  wide  scope ;  hence, 
they  introduced  two  other  substitutes  known  as  the 
Kreutzer  and  the  Hagemeister  amendments,  which  were 
limited  in  their  operation  to  the  nomination  of  candi- 
dates for  county  offices.  Both  of  these  bills  provided  for 
open  primaries,  and  substituted  for  the  nomination 
paper  a  fee  and  an  affidavit  of  hona,  fide  intention  to  run 
for  the  office  as  stated. 

The  Hagemeister  substitute  passed  the  Senate  and 
was  sent  to  the  Assembly.  It  was  a  bill  of  exceedingly 
slim  proportions,  containing  only  seven  sections.  Its 
limitation  to  county  offices  made  it  waste  paper  as  far 
as  the  cities  were  concerned.  It  was  not  even  a  half- 
way reform,  replacing,  as  it  did,  only  one  set  of  caucuses 
and  conventions.  By  calling  into  operation  all  the  elec- 
tion machinery  which  would  have  been  required  to  nomi- 
nate all  officers  of  the  State,  it  entailed  an  expense  and 
involved  a  trouble  out  of  all  proportion  to  any  possible 
advantages  which  might  have  resulted.  By  requiring  a 
fee  from  candidates,  it  discriminated  against  the  poor 
aspirants  to  office,  and  increased  the  difficulties  of  the 
minority  party  in  getting  good  men  to  run,  when  defeat 
at  the  polls  was  almost  certain.  The  cities,  where  re- 
form is  most  needed,  would  have  been  left  untouched. 
It  was  manifestly  a  piece  of  "machine"  legislation  de- 
signed to  work  harm  to  the  cause  of  primary  reform. 
The  incompleteness  and  imperfections  of  the  provisions 
would  unquestionably  have  led  to  difficulties  which 
would  have  discredited  the  cause,  and  would  have  post- 
poned the  day  when  the  people  should  name  their  own 
candidates  for  office  by  direct  vote.^ 

>  Leading  arguments  of  Hon.  E.  Ray  Stevens  in  opposing  the  Hagemeister  bUl 
before  the  Assembly. 


254  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

Upon  these  and  other  grounds  the  friends  of  direct 
primaries  in  the  Assembly  rejected  the  Ilagemeister  bill 
and  framed  a  final  and  fair  compromise,  limiting  the 
system  to  the  nomination  of  all  candidates  for  city  and 
connty  offices,  and  for  the  members  of  the  legislature. 
What  was  of  even  more  consequence  at  that  critical 
juncture  was  the  application  of  the  referendum  prin- 
ciple to  the  adoption  of  the  Assembly  substitute.  The 
act  was  to  be  submitted  to  the  people  of  the  State  at  an 
election  held  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  April,  1902,  and 
was  to  be  in  force  only  if  a  majority  of  votes  were  cast 
in  its  favor.  This  was  pre-eminently  a  fair  proposition 
to  meet  the  objection  of  all  those  who  claimed  that  there 
was  no  demand  for  such  a  law,  or  who  had  been  made 
to  feel  uncertain  or  doubtful  as  to  public  sentiment.  It 
removed  all  responsibility  from  the  shoulders  of  those 
who  opposed  direct  primaries,  and  gave  them  the  oppor- 
tunity, if  they  so  desired,  to  prove  their  contention  that 
the  people  did  not  want  a  direct  primary  law.  Yet  they 
voted  down  the  compromise  bill  of  the  Assembly,  with 
its  referendum  provision,  and  requested  that  body  to  re- 
consider its  vote  upon  the  Hagemeister  substitute.  The 
Assembly  did  so,  and  by  a  vote  of  48  to  46  passed  the 
Hagemeister  substitute. 

There  now  remained  naught  but  Governor  La  Toi- 
lette's signature.  Those  who  knew  him  were  not  sur- 
prised at  his  ringing  veto  message  "which  excelled  in 
intellectual  vigor  and  moral  earnestness  any  executive 
message  which  we  have  read  in  recent  years."  -^  In 
talcing  his  position  against  the  bill,  the  Governor  set  forth 

1  "  Governor  La  FoUette's  Ringing  Message,"  Outloolc,  May  25, 1901. 


Primary  Heform  in  Wisconsin.  255 

his  reasons  in  a  clear  and  convincing  form.     The  ITage- 
meister  bill,  optional  and  imperfect  as  it  was,  and  lim- 
ited to  county  officers,  was  a  mockery  of  the  party's 
pledge  "that  all  candidates  for  state,  legislative,  con- 
gressional, and  county  offices  be  nominated  at  a  primary 
election  upon  the  same  day  by  direct  vote."    lie  reminds 
the  legislators  that  "the  declarations  and  promises  of 
his  party  to  the  public"  for  which  each  of  them  indi- 
vidually stands  "is  a  sacred  public  trust,  and  to  its  faith- 
ful execution  as  a  man   and  public  official  he  is  in 
honor  bound."     He  also  suggests  that  "it  would  be  diffi- 
cult indeed  to  cite  another  instance  in  the  history  of  the 
State  where  a  great  measure  of  such  fundamental  im- 
portance in  government  w^as  more  fully  and  clearly  out- 
lined and  more  generally  discussed  so  long  in  advance.-^ 
There  were  no  public  expressions  of  significance  to  in- 
dicate any  dissent  from  the  platform  as  adopted  at  the 
state  convention  until  after  the  organization  of  the  legis- 
lature,  when   bold   declarations   were   made   that   one 
branch  was  so  organized  as  to  defeat  all  primary  legis- 
lation.   Immediately  upon  the  presentation  of  the  Stev- 
ens bill  "a  systematic  campaign  of  misrepresentation 
began  to  be  waged.     *     *     *     ^^  array  of  federal  of- 
ficeholders, joining  with  certain  corporation  agents,  and 
the  representatives  of  the  "machine"  in  regular  legisla- 
tive lobby,  moved  upon  the  capitol,  took  possession  of  its 
corridors,  intruded  into  the  legislative  halls,  followed 
members  to  their  hotels,  tempted  many  with  alluring 
forms  of  vice,  and,  in  some  instances,  brought  them  to 
the  capitol  in  a  state  of  intoxication  to  vote  against  the 
bill." 

» See  p.  246. 


256  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

The  message  then  points  out  some  of  the  gross  de- 
ficiencies of  the  bilL    "No  time  is  fixed  for  the  canvass 
of  the  vote,  no  duty  imposed  upon  the  county  board  to 
make  it,  and  no  provision  is  found  by  which  it  can  be 
compelled  to  act"  until  the  time  fixed  by  statute  for  mak- 
ing the  canvass  of  fall  elections  has  arrived.     "Thus, 
the  ofiices  would  be  filled  by  an  election  before  the  ques- 
tion as  to  who  were  to  be  candidates  had  been  lawfully 
determined."    The  law,  if  enacted,  would  also  have  been 
inoperative  because,  according  to  the  referendum  clause, 
it  was  not  to  go  into  effect  until  it  had  been  voted  upon 
by  all  the  people  of  the  State  at  "the  spring  or  municipal 
elections  of  1902."     "!N"o  such  election  is  held  in  the 
city  of  La  Crosse — one  of  the  most  important  and  popu- 
lous cities  of  the  State- — in  1902 ;"  hence,  the  electors  of 
that  city  would  have  been  denied  any  opportunity  to  vote 
upon  the  question,  while  there  are  probably  other  cities 
which  would  have  been  similarly  disfranchised.     "It  is 
not  competent  for  the  legislature  to  exclude  any  electors 
of  the  State  from  participation  in  a  proposed  submission 
of  a  measure  designed  to  have  force  and  effect  through- 
out the  State."     For  this  reason  alone  the  law  would 
have  been  unconstitutional  even  though  it  had  received 
the  Governor's  signature.^ 

The  veto  of  Governor  La  Eollette  brought  to  a  tem- 
porary close  what  was  probably  the  most  turbulent  and, 
in  some  respects,  most  unscrupulous  fight  ever  waged  in 
this  country  against  primary  reform.  The  veto  rescued 
the  State  from  the  enactment  of  an  imperfect  piece  of 
legislation  which   would   have   cast    serious  reflections 

'  For  other  illustrations  of  the  imperfection  of  the  proposed  law,  see  the  Gov- 
ernor's veto  message  of  May  11,  1901,  and  also  p.  253. 


Primary  Reform  in  Wisconsin.  257 

upon  our  legislative  and  executive  departments,  and 
would  have  made  their  action  the  subject  of  well-de- 
served ridicule.  The  defeat  in  the  legislature  of  all  hon- 
est efforts  at  pledged  reform  in  defiance  of  the  will  of 
the  majority  expressed  in  the  election,  cannot  but  greatly 
aid  in  the  struggle  for  better  primaries  which  will  con- 
tinue with  ever-increasing  vigor. 

In  order  more  effectively  to  prosecute  their  campaign 
against  Governor  La  Toilette  and  the  Republican  party, 
the  opposition  elements  in  the  State  have  organized  them- 
selves in  striking  resemblance  to  Tammany  Hall,  under 
the  name  of  the  "Wisconsin  Republican  League,"  which, 
while  it  presumes  to  represent  the  vital  interests  of  the 
party,  is  really  composed  of  self -constituted  authorities 
representing  the  "machine"  interests  in  the  State.    This 
organization  now  occupies  sumptuous  quarters  in  one  of 
the  finest  buildings  in  Milwaukee,  and  has  a  large  list  of 
salaried  employees,  ranging  from  the  highest  to  the  low- 
est, besides  paid  agents  and  "workers"  in  every  commu- 
nity.    In  imitation  of  Tammany  methods,  a  systematic 
political  canvass  of  the  voting  population  of  the  State 
has  been  undertaken.     Poll  books  have  been  prepared, 
the  information  sought  being  arranged  under  four  heads : 
Voter's  party  affiliations,  sure ;  voter's  party  affiliations, 
doubtful;  voter's  religion;  language  read.     Where  the 
voter  is  a  Republican,  he  is  further  classified  as  a  "sure 
Republican  for  us"  or  "against  us,"  or  as  a  "doubtful 
Republican  for  us,"  or  "against  us."     As  was  so  well 
demonstrated  in  New  York,  an  organization  of  this  kind, 
born  for  political  control,  possesses  all  the  elements  of  a 
dominating  power,  and  must  be  looked  upon  as  a  fearful 
menace  to  political  liberty  in  this  State.     It  is  well  for 
17 


258  Direct  Primary  Legislation. 

the  people  of  Wisconsin  to  remember  that  those  who  are 
most  intimately  acquainted  with  the  political  situation, 
declare  the  organization  in  its  constitution,  its  purpose, 
and  its  action,  to  be  the  counterpart  of  the  Tammany 
power  in  N^ew  York.  The  future  of  primary  reform,  as 
well  as  of  tax  and  other  reforms  in  Wisconsin,  will  de- 
pend largely  upon  the  position  which  the  people  of  the 
State  take  with  reference  to  this  highly  organized  and 
undemocratic  power. 


PART  III 


AN  ANALYSIS   OF    THE  MAIN  ARGU- 
MENTS FOR  AND  AGAINST  THE 
DIRECT  PRIMARY 


CHAPTER  I. 

A  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

We  have  arrived  at  the  stage  of  conflict,  and  must 
now  study  the  battle.  Face  to  face  there  stand  the  cham- 
pions of  the  direct  primary  and  of  the  convention  system. 
The  field  of  struggle  has  already  been  outlined.  We 
know  the  ground  of  the  primary,  as  we  know  that  of  the 
convention,  and  while  we  watch  the  contest  we  may, 
upon  the  basis  of  the  past,  speculate  as  to  its  outcome. 
Merit,  we  believe,  ultimately  wins  the  people,  hence  we 
shall  endeavor  to  weigh  the  virtue  of  the  two  ideas  for 
which  the  champions  in  the  struggle  stand.  They  do  not 
fight  on  even  ground.  The  champion  of  the  convention 
has  an  advantage  over  him  of  the  direct  primary.  The 
former  has  but  to  fight  on  ground  already  his  own ;  the 
latter  must  first  fight  for  the  ground  on  which  he  hopes 
to  win.  Since  the  odds  are  heavy  against  him,  even  the 
chance  of  a  trial  is  obtained  only  with  great  difficulty, 
and  rarely  is  attained  on  equal  terms. 

Defection  in  some  of  its  important  features,  forced 
by  compromise  with  the  opposition,  has  been  an  almost 
uniform  characteristic  of  direct  primary  legislation. 
Where  the  provisions  are  sound  as  far  as  they  go,  they 
often  do  not  go  far  enough  to  form  a  complete  system. 
In  many  cases,  especially  in  the  South  and  Middle  West, 
the  direct  primaries  have  practically  been  left  in  the 
hands  of  the  political  parties  (which  generally  means 
in  the  hands  of  the  hostile  party  "machine,"  or  "boss") 


262  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

instead  of  under  the  protection  of  tlie  State.  Where  this 
has  been  done,  we  must  not  look  for  the  success  of  the 
system,  any  more  than  we  need  look  for  a  hanging  where 
the  criminal  is  presented  with  a  rope  accompanied  by  the 
assurance  that  the  State  will  protect  him  in  his  action 
should  he  choose  to  make  use  of  it.  Again,  there  are 
instances  where  the  State  and  the  party  share  in  the 
control  of  the  primary,  and  as  in  all  cases  of  half-way 
measures  only  half -av ay  results  are  attained.  To  give 
the  direct  primary  principle  a  fair  trial  it  is  necessary 
to  incorporate  it  in  a  complete  legal  system  in  which 
all  details  of  operation  are  determined  and  safeguarded 
by  law,  and  which  is  constructed  upon  the  basis  of  the 
best  facts  attainable. 

What  the  direct  primary  reform  endeavors  to  accom- 
plish is  to  give  the  people  a  better  government  than 
they  at  present  enjoy.  This  it  hopes  to  do  by  placing  in 
office  more  uniformly  honest,  faithful,  and  capable  men, 
who  will  be  responsible  in  their  official  capacity  to  the 
people.  We  have  to-day,  in  many  of  the  departments  of 
government,  from  the  town  up  to  the  ^Nation,  officials 
who  are  not  the  representatives  of  the  people,  but  who 
are  the  creatures  of  a  small  group  of  men  which  has  ac- 
quired the  power  of  placing  them  in  office.  They  are 
responsible,  not  to  a  body  politic,  but  to  a  narrow  ring  of 
politicians,  and  are  bound  to  perform  their  duties  as 
public  sei-vants  more  or  less  according  to  the  dictates  of 
these  independent  "bosses,"  who,  having  made  politics 
their  business  which  is  to  yield  them  their  daily  bread 
as  comfortably  as  possible  and  swell  the  profits  of  the  in- 
terests which  they  usually  represent,  enter  into  the  work 
with  the  spirit  of  private  enterprise,  issue  their  orders 


Introduction  of  the  Argument.  263 

for  the  promotion  of  private  interests,  and  tlicreby  turn 
the  public  official  in  a  public  office,  into  a  private  ser- 
vant in  a  private  concern.  It  is  only  when  the  private 
interests  of  the  ''boss"  coincide  with  those  of  the  public,^ 
that  efficient  government  can  reasonably  be  expected. 
But  public  and  private  interests  are  seldom  identical,  es- 
pecially where  the  latter  are  in  selfish,  unscrupulous 
hands,  and  thus  it  happens  that  where  political  combi- 
nations control  offices,  government  lacks  proper  effi- 
ciency. Public  and  prix^ate  interests  can,  however,  bo 
made  largely  identical  by  expanding  the  small  political 
combination  through  the  admission  of  all  legal  voters,  as 
representatives  of  the  main  private  interests.  Thus  we 
obtain  a  body  politic  which  governs  itself,  and  which 
would  therefore  naturally  tend  to  govern  in  its  o"\;vn  in- 
terests, as  it  understood  them.  This  is  just  what  the 
primary  reformer  hopes  to  do. 

It  stands  to  reason  that  to  improve  our  government 
where  it  has  fallen  into  the  hands  of  a  few,  we  must 
once  more  place  it  in  the  hands  of  the  many.  Every 
voter  must  be  given  not  only  a  nominal,  but  a  real  voice 
in  government.  The  idea,  therefore,  of  the  advocates  of 
primary  reform  is  sound  and  reasonable.  They  desire 
to  place  the  people  in  power,  where  combinations  of  men 
have  ousted  them.  They  hope  to  restore  to  every  voter 
an  effective  vote,  and  effective  voting  by  all  voters  lies  at 
the  basis  of  good  government.  A  question  however 
arises  as  to  the  method  of  accomplishing  this  purpose. 
Will  the  direct  primary  on  which  the  reformers  have  so 
boundlessly  staked  their  faith  do  what  is  expected  of  it  ? 
This  is  the  real  question  at  issue.  Effective  voting  is 
what  every  patriotic  citizen  of  this  country  desires,  but 


264  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

can  it  be  obtained  through  the  institution  of  a  direct  vote 
system  ? 

In  order  to  forestall  any  misinterpretations,  and  to 
narrow  the  discussion  in  answer  to  this  question  down 
to  its  proper  sphere,  we  are  now  ready  to  make  three 
assumptions :  ( 1 )  That,  since  party  government  is  nec- 
essary, party  organization  must  be  maintained;  (2) 
That  we  are  all  agreed  to  grant  to  every  legal  voter  a 
free  and  equal  ballot  which  shall  count  one  as  the  voter 
wishes;  (3)  That  political  conditions  have  been  faith- 
fully represented  in  Part  I,  to  the  effect  that  at  present 
every  vote  does  not  count  one  at  all,  or  does  not  count 
one  as  the  voter  wishes.  These  three  assumptions  will 
confine  the  arguments  to  the  relative  merits  of  the  cau- 
cus and  convention  system,  and  that  of  the  direct  pri- 
mary, considered  purely  as  nominating  machinery 
through  which  the  voter  is  to  be  given  an  effective  voice 
in  the  nomination  of  candidates  to  elective  offices.  Under 
which  system  will  the  winning  political  party  place  in 
office  the  best  men  ?  Since  the  machinery  through  which 
the  party  must  act  varies  widely  in  the  two  cases,  and 
necessarily  greatly  affects  its  internal  organization  and 
working,  the  first  inquiry  may  well  be  limited  to  which 
system  best  maintains  an  effective  party  organization, 
or  whether  both  do  so,  leaving  the  second  question,  which 
system  provides  the  best  nominating  machinery  through 
which  a  properly  organized  party  may  act  in  selecting 
the  personnel  of  the  government,  to  later  discussion. 


CHAPTER  II. 

PARTY    ORGANIZATION    UNDER    DIRECT    PRIMARIES. 

Good  party  government  depends  upon  good  party  ac- 
tion, and  this  in  turn  depends  upon  strong  party  organ- 
ization. Without  well  organized  parties,  democratic 
government  would  be  a  farce.  No  institution  can  be  tol- 
erated which  hampers  the  action  or  threatens  the  life  of 
political  parties.  This  charge  is  sometimes  advanced 
against  direct  primaries,  upon  the  ground  that  the  main- 
stay of  party  life,  the  convention,  is  abolished.  Whether 
this  it  true  remains  to  be  seen. 

A  strong  party  organization  is  characterized  by  unity 
of  action.  Its  requisites  are  harmony  of  membership  and 
mutual  loyalty  and  confidence  among  its  representa- 
tives in  the  public  service,  its  chosen  leaders,  and  its 
members.  To-day  these  conditions  often  fail  us.  Where 
one-man-power  in  politics  has  attained  any  degi-ee  of 
prominence  at  all,  there  is  a  corresponding  sacrifice  of 
proper  representation,  not  only  in  government,  but  in 
the  determination  of  party  organization,  of  its  governing 
committees,  and  of  its  membership.  This  sacrifice  is 
most  pronounced  in  our  cities,  and  in  many  cases,  as  in 
"New  York,  is  practically  absolute.  Where  such  con- 
ditions obtain,  the  first  requisite  of  a  permanently  strong 
and  healthy  party  organization  is  wanting — that  of  mu- 
tual loyalty  and  confidence  between  party  officials  and 
members.  The  party  officers  are  not  the  choice  of  its 
members,  but  are  the  creatures  of  politicians.     Party 


266  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary, 

meral3ersliip  is  not  determined  by  tlie  wislies  of  tlie 
party,  but  by  the  Croker  and  Piatt  rings  which  ?!re  in 
control.  Only  "ward  heelers,"  and  voters  willing  to 
pledge  themselves  to  obey  the  dictates  of  party  "bosses," 
are  admitted  to  its  more  active  membership,  while  the 
great  body  of  real,  faithful  partisans  are  entirely  ex- 
cluded from  exercising  any  controlling  voice  in  party 
action.  Hence  the  second  requisite  of  a  strong  organ- 
ization, harmony  of  membership,  is  lacking.  The  ab- 
sence of  unity  of  action  necessarily  follows,  so  that  in 
extreme  cases  under  our  present  system,  hardly  a  shadow 
of  proper  party  organization  remains.  The  "strong" 
party  organizations  which  are  often  found  in  control  of 
politics  today,  are  but  apparently  strong.  They  are 
powerful,  not  by  virtue  of  the  enthusiasm  of  partisan- 
ship issuing  from  their  members,  but  because  they  are  in 
the  relentless  grasp  of  highly  organized  and  narrow 
rings  of  politicians. 

Under  a  direct  primary  system  party  oflBcers  can  be 
chosen  by  direct  vote,  and  being  the  choice  of  the  masses 
of  the  party,  there  is  no  reason  why  the  relation  of 
mutual  loyalty  and  confidence  should  not  exist  between 
them.  Similarly,  important  questions  of  party  organ- 
ization and  party  membership  could  be  submitted  to  a 
vote  of  the  party  at  the  primaries.  This  would  insure 
justice  in  the  membership  rules,  which  would  be  further 
safeguarded  by  state  regulations  of  how  parties  shall 
participate  in  the  primaries.  There  would  hence  also 
exist  harmony  of  membership,  from  which  results  unity 
of  action — the  sign  of  a  healthy  organization. 

That  the  direct  primary  would  prove  a  distinct  im- 
provement over  present  conditions  of  party  organization 


Party  Organization  Tinder  Direct  Primaries.     2G7 

M^liere  "machine"  politics  obtains,  can  liardly  be  ques- 
tioned. The  incorporation  in  the  Oregon  law  of  thor- 
ough provisions  for  the  popular  control  of  party  organ- 
ization is  highly  commendable  and  of  interest  in  this 
connection.^  It  is  a  feature  which  is  distinctly  in  the 
van  of  primary  legislation  in  this  country,  but  seems  to 
point  the  way  in  the  right  direction. 

But  even  stronger  disintegrating  forces  than  are 
found  in  the  "machine-controlled"  party  organization, 
are  set  free  in  the  caucuses  and  conventions  as  a  result 
of  "machine"  activity.  At  the  primary  or  caucus  it 
often  happens  that  the  party  voter  finds  his  wishes 
thwarted.  He  finds  repulsive  men  nominated  for  local 
offices.  He  finds  "machine"  delegates  elected  to  con- 
ventions and  "machine"  men  put  in  charge  of  party 
business.  In  the  convention,  he  finds  offensive  candi- 
dates named,  instructions,  if  any,  disobeyed,  perverted, 
or  sacrificed  by  proxy  vote,  platforms  framed  with  open 
disregard  of  his  desires.  If  in  such  cases  the  voter  is 
sufficiently  independent  or  finds  it  impossible  to  support 
"machine"  men,  he  has  but  three  alternatives ;  he  may 
stay  away  from  the  polls  on  general  election  day,  which 
experience  shows  he  often  does ;  he  may  stir  up  enough 
"anti-machine"  feeling  to  cause  a  split  in  the  party, 
thus  compromising  its  success;  or  he  may  join  the  ranks 
of  an  opposing  party  in  the  hope  of  killing  the  enemy 
at  home  by  supporting  the  enemy  abroad.  The  second 
course  shows  the  best  spirit.  It  indicates  strong  parti- 
sanship and  willingness  to  fight  for  one's  rights.  Vol- 
untary disfranchisement,  the  first  alternative  mentioned, 

'  See  p.  229. 


268  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

shows  cowardice  and  a  deplorable  lack  of  a  proper  con- 
ception of  the  duty  of  citizenship ;  while  the  third  alter- 
native bears  little  fruit.  It  leaves  the  "machine"  in 
peaceful  possession.  Either  one  of  these  courses  tends 
to  destroy  party  organization,  and  to  give  birth  to  dis- 
ruptions and  dissensions  which  entirely  defeat  the  pur- 
poses for  which  the  modem  political  party  exists. 

Under  the  direct  primary  the  voter  feels  that  he  has 
had  an  immediate  and  certain  hand  in  performing  all 
the  functions  of  the  party,  and  if  his  wishes  have  failed 
to  win  the  day,  he  is  ready  to  abide  by  the  results  of  the 
larger  numbers,  for  so  firmly  is  the  idea  that  the  decision 
of  the  greater  numbers  at  the  polls  must  rule,  implanted 
in  the  American  mind,  that  the  nominees  of  the  primary 
will  receive  the  united  support  of  the  party  at  the  gen- 
eral election.  It  seems  to  have  been  a  matter  of  general 
experience  where  the  most  advanced  forms  of  direct  pri- 
maries are  in  operation,  as  in  Minnesota  and  Kentucky, 
for  the  defeated  and  the  successful  candidates  to  preserve 
a  feeling  of  good  fellowship,  or  to  conciliate  where  dif- 
ferences had  arisen. 

At  a  convention,  more  or  less  personal  collision  is  cer- 
tain to  occur.  Great  bitterness  of  feeling  is  easily 
aroused  where  all  aspirants  and  their  friends  are  gath- 
ered within  four  walls ;  wnere  enemy  and  friend  are  at 
arm's  length  of  each  other ;  where  in  the  height  of  con- 
flicting emotions  and  desperate  efforts  at  success,  words 
are  likely  to  pass  which  create  permanent  breaches,  even 
between  old  friends.  Suspicions  of  foul  play  are 
easily  aroused  where  the  feelings  of  the  ambitious 
run  high,  as  they  do  in  conventions.  As  a  result,  dis- 
sensions within  the  party  spring  up,  candidates  play 


Party  Organization  Under  Direct  Primaries.     269 

into  the  hands  of  their  opponents  by  fighting  each  other, 
and  thus  may  compromise  the  success  of  their  party. 
There  must  be  peace  at  home  before  there  can  bo 
strength  abroad.  Where  the  direct  primary  decides  the 
nominations,  defeated  candidates  feel  that  they  have 
had  a  fair  and  open  chance  which  proved  that  they  were 
not  wanted.  Conciliation  takes  place  more  readily  and 
party  harmony  is  preserved. 

As  soon  as  the  direct  primary  principle  is  applied 
beyond  the  confines  of  the  locality,  the  necessity  of  pro- 
mulgating a  platform  arises.  It  is  claimed  that  the 
absence  of  a  proper  organ  to  perform  this  function  under 
a  direct  primary  system,  together  with  other  reasons, 
makes  it  impossible  to  apply  such  a  scheme  successfully 
beyond  the  confines  of  local  political  units;  that  there 
would  exist  no  means  of  holding  the  party  together  on 
larger  policies  and  principles;  and  that  each  candidate 
would  stand  upon  his  own  platform,  thereby  confusing 
the  \oter  and  destroying  the  essence  of  the  ballot.  ISTo 
primary  election  law  has  as  yet  been  enacted  covering 
the  entire  State  for  all  offices,  and  dealing  with  the  prob- 
lem of  formulating  a  party  platform.  A  few  laws  em- 
bracing counties  have  touched  upon  it  to  some  extent.-^ 
The  Oregon  law  of  1901  provides  that  "propositions" 
of  party  policies  and  principles  within  the  county  are 
to  be  submitted  to  a  vote  at  the  primary. 

A  number  of  defeated  bills  have,  however,  proposed  to 
solve  the  problem  of  a  state  platform.  Among  these 
mav  be  mentioned  the  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin  as  re- 
turned  from  the  committee,  which  vested  the  power  of 

'  See  p.  230. 


270  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

making  a  platform  with  the  state  central  committee  of 
the  partj;  the  original  Stevens  bill  which  gave  that 
power  to  the  candidates  for  state  offices  and  for  the 
legislature  who  had  been  nominated  at  the  primary; 
the  ISTorth  Dakota  bill  which  followed  the  state  central 
committee  plan  of  the  Stevens  bill;  and  the  Colby  bill 
of  Michigan,  which  left  the  matter  with  a  convention 
of  delegates  to  be  called  by  the  party  committee  at  least 
sixty  days  before  the  primary,  and  which  provided  that, 
in  case  of  failure  to  call  such  a  convention,  the  party 
candidates  were  to  frame  the  platform. 

These  bills  favor  neither  one  nor  the  other  scheme. 
In  support  of  a  platform  made  by  candidat.es  it  may  be 
said  that  it  stands  nearer  to  them,  and  that  they  are 
made  more  directly  responsible  for  it.  The  candidates 
know  public  sentiment;  they  liave  studied  public  ques- 
tions carefully,  and  may  be  given  credit  for  honest  ef- 
forts to  touch  the  pulse  of  the  people.  Having  framed 
their  ovtu  platform,  they  are  bound  to  feel  a  personal  as 
well  as  an  official  responsibility  for  it,  and  are  more 
likely  to  carry  out  its  provisions  faithfully  than  if  it  had 
been  foisted  upon  them.  It  is  claimed  that  a  platform  so 
framed  is  farther  removed  from  the  people,  but  the 
candidates  who  have  just  been  nominated  by  the  people 
ought  to  reflect  their  will  as  to  platform  principles  with 
greater  faithfulness  than  would  delegates  whose  re- 
sponsibility ends  with  the  adjournment  of  the  conven- 
tion. As  to  the  objection  that  a  platform  framed  by 
candidates  presents  the  anomaly  of  a  platform  framed 
after  a  nomination  instead  of  a  nomination  upon  a  plat- 
form already  dravm ;  that  candidates  are  chosen  before 
the  policies  and  principles  for  which  they  are  to  stand 


Party  Organization  Under  Direct  Primaries.     271 

have  been  given  definite,  formal,  and  binding  expres- 
sion, it  is  answered  that  platforms  framed  in  conven- 
tions are  generally  drawn  before  the  convention  assem- 
bles; that  they  are  considered  only  by  two  or  three 
"bosses"  who  contrive  to  be  members  of  the  "set  up" 
commitfee  on  platform  which  accepts  what  has  been  pre- 
pared and  reports  it  back  to  a  convention,  where  without 
debate  or  deliberation  it  is  hurrahed  through  by  excited 
delegates  eager  to  begin  the  battle  for  nomination.  As  to 
the  candidates  so  nominated  upon  a  platform  so  framed, 
it  seems  preposterous  to  claim  that  they  represent  prin- 
ciples or  stand  for  declared  policies  of  government.  A 
platform  so  drawn  can  mean  no  more  and  no  less  to  the 
candidates  or  to  the  people,  whether  it  be  adopted  before 
or  after  the  business  of  nomination  has  been  completed. 
In  either  instance,  it  is  a  farcical  expression  of  what  is 
supposedly  the  delegated  will  of  the  people,  which  the 
time  of  its  adoption  can  in  nowise  affect.  On  the  other 
hand,  candidates  under  a  direct  primary  system  will  be 
strong  enough  to  secure  nomination  only  as  they  embody, 
represent,  and  express  in  their  candidacy  political  prin- 
ciples and  administrative  policies  which  command  con- 
fidence and  support  with  the  members  of  their  party. 
These  policies  and  principles  will  be  the  real  issue  in  the 
campaign  preliminary  to  the  primary  election,  and  their 
declaration  and  explanation  will  be  the  constant  aim 
and  effort  of  every  candidate  in  the  prosecution  of  his 
personal  campaign.  In  other  words,  it  will  not  make  so 
much  difference  how  the  candidate  spells  his  name,  as 
what  his  candidacy  signifies — what  it  stands  for  and 
represents.  The  policy  will  take  precedence  of  the  man. 
This  is  one  of  the  strong  reasons  for  direct  primaries; 


272  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

that  principles  will  count  for  more  than  men ;  that  can- 
didates will  no  longer  be  chosen  because  they  are 
"wanted"  by  this  interest  or  that  boss,  but  because  they 
are  the  exponents  of  ideas  essential  to  good  government. 
Hence,  the  primary  election  which  results  in  their  nomi- 
nation is  a  specific  declaration  of  the  party  upon  the 
principles  to  be  incorporated  in  the  platform.  The  de- 
termination of  that  matter  in  the  minds  of  the  party 
has  been  made  in  fact  before  the  polling  of  the  vote — the 
marking  of  the  ballot,  casting  it  and  having  it  counted, 
is  but  the  recording  of  the  will  of  the  party  already 
determined.  It  remains  only  to  express  the  principles 
adopted  by  the  party  in  the  nomination  of  the  candidates 
in  plain  direct  terms  suitable  for  a  platform.  Who  is 
better  equipped  to  do  that  than  the  candidates  whom  the 
party  has  chosen  as  the  best  living  expression  of  those 
principles  ?  Who  will  be  more  anxious  that  the  platform 
should  reflect  the  will  of  the  party  that  has  nominated 
them,  and  who  will  be  more  faithful  in  fulfilling  the 
promises  so  made  in  the  platform,  than  these  candi- 
dates ? 

The  promulgation  of  a  platform  by  the  state  central 
committee  has  been  suggested  to  meet  the  objection  of 
a  post-nomination  platform,  and  maintains  the  present 
order  of  "platform  first,"  but  most  of  the  other  objections 
remain.  The  convention  of  candidates  is  a  more  imme- 
diately representative  body  than  is  the  party  committee 
as  determined  by  the  recency  of  the  election.  The  party 
committee  is  also  likely  to  be  less  capable,  honest,  and 
unprejudiced  than  a  body  of  newly  nominated  candi- 
dates, who  are  intensely  interested  in  public  questions 


Party  Organization  Under  Direct  Primaries.     27 


Q 


and  wlio  have  been  closely  watching  every  stir  and 
breath  of  public  opinion. 

Colby's  idea  of  a  platform  framed  by  an  especially 
elected  delegate  convention  is  theoretically  a  good  one. 
It  has  all  the  advantages  of  the  state  central  committee 
plan,  and  in  addition,  brings  the  platform  about  as  near 
to  the  people  as  well  can  be  under  a  delegate  and  conven- 
tion system.  Under  pure  conditions  of  politics  the  con- 
vention is  undoubtedly  the  ideal  place  for  the  promulga- 
tion of  a  platform,  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  with 
politics  such  as  we  have  to-day  lurking  dangers  will  beset 
the  doors  of  any  convention,  and  will  tend  to  pervert  its 
functions,  especially  in  those  localities  where  reform  is 
most  needed.  A  convention  such  as  Colby  suggests 
would  be  an  irresponsible  and  more  or  less  uninterested 
body.  It  cannot  be  called  upon  to  stand  by  its  platform, 
but  imposes  certain  policies  and  principles  upon  an  en- 
tirely different  set  of  men,  nominated  through  an  en- 
tirely different  agency.  There  may  be  considerable  re- 
luctance among  candidates  to  accept  such  a  platform. 
Any  statement  to  that  effect  by  a  candidate  might  incur 
the  suspicion  and  distrust  of  the  public,  and  thus  tend 
to  defeat  the  general  endorsement  of  the  platform. 

If  the  platform  is  to  be  framed  and  promulgated 
prior  to  nominations,  then  it  seems  that  a  proper  organ 
for  its  formulation  is  one  in  which  there  is  incorporated 
the  principle  found  in  our  modem  convention  system 
{hat  the  same  body  which  nominates  the  candidates 
must  have  a  controlling  influence  in  determining  the 
most  important  features  of  a  platform  upon  which  those 
candidates  are  to  stand.  Harmony  in  case  of  a  direct 
vote  system  would  seem  to  be  completely  secured  through 
18 


274  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

the  combination  of  these  two  functions  in  one  organ — 
the  body  politic.  This  can  be  accomplished  through  the 
application  of  the  referendum  principle  bj  vesting  in 
the  people  the  power  of  a  veto  over  the  main  issues  in 
a  platform  which  is  to  be  drawn  by  the  state  central 
committee  of  the  party  somewhat  upon  the  plan  by  which 
"propositions"  of  party  policy  or  principle  are  sub- 
mitted to  a  vote  at  the  primary  under  the  Oregon  law 
of  the  present  year.  The  submission  of  only  main  issues 
which  the  voter  has  well  in  mind  would  avoid  confusion, 
and  would  remove  the  objection  that  the  masses  do  not 
possess  sufficient  knowledge  and  insight  to  pass  upon  the 
details  of  a  platform  intelligently.  In  order  further  to 
clothe  the  voter  with  the  consciousness  of  power,  the 
possibility  of  having  any  particular  details  submitted 
upon  petition  might  be  incorporated. 

Such  a  plan  would  meet  the  objection  of  the  irre- 
sponsibility of  the  state  central  committee  in  the  making 
of  a  platform.  The  power  of  a  veto,  by  keeping  open 
the  possibility  of  its  exercise,  would  have  a  negative, 
rather  than  a  positive  effect.  It  would  compel,  rather 
than  dictate.  The  right  to  force  the  submission  of  par- 
ticular propositions  would  greatly  increase  the  reserve 
powers  of  the  voter,  and  would  guard  against  deceit  and 
chicane,  in  the  submission  of  issues  by  the  committee. 
The  people  and  the  candidates  would  have  greater  con- 
fidence in  the  platform  as  well  as  in  each  other.  The 
platform,  just  as  the  candidates,  would  be  brought  nearer 
to  the  people.  There  would  be  an  ante-nomination  in- 
stead of  a  post-nomination  platform.  Government  in 
accordance  with  such  a  platform,  would  be  in  accordance 
with  the  latest  possible  expression  or  confirmation  of 


Party  Organization  Under  Direct  Primaries.     275 

policy  bj  tlie  public.  The  uncertainty  introduced  into 
the  platform  through  a  possible  exercise  of  the  veto 
jx)wer,  can  in  no  way  affect  the  candidates,  since  as  pub- 
lic officials  they  pledge  themselves  to  act  in  harmony 
with  the  latest  principles  which  their  party  may  have  af- 
firmed, whatever  these  may  be.  Every  voter  would  have 
the  chance  of  two  effective  votes  upon  the  question  of 
governmental  policy  as  upon  that  of  candidates,  one  at 
the  primary  and  the  other  at  the  general  election.  Can 
the  voter  be  entrusted  with  this  power  ?  Does  he  possess 
the  necessary  integrity  and  intelligence?  There  are 
voters  who  can  be  corrupted,  or  who  will  vote  ignorantly, 
but  he  who  answers  the  question  in  the  negative,  in  es- 
sence declares  that  more  corrupt  than  uncorrupt  votes 
would  be  cast;  that  more  ignorant  than  intelligent  bal- 
lots would  be  polled;  in  short,  that  democratic  govern- 
ment is  impracticable  and  impossible  to-day.  This  asser- 
tion requires  no  answer  here,  or  any^'here.^  The  writer 
believes  that  some  such  scheme  as  has  been  suggested 
would  probably  effectually  solve  the  platform  problem, 
and  give  to  the  party  a  better  platform  than  is  possible 
in  most  cases  under  the  convention  system  which  the 
direct  primary  would  displace.  In  this  respect  it  there- 
fore also  seems  possible  to  preserve  an  efficient  party 
organization  under  a  direct  primary  system. 

Party  apostasy  will  be  greatly  reduced  under  direct 
primaries.  At  present,  where  "machine"  candidates 
have  been  set  up,  all  that  remains  to  the  voter  is  to  waste 
his  vote  on  the  "machine,"  or  to  forsake  his  party  en- 
tirely. In  case  of  the  direct  primaries  this  is  not  neces- 
sary ;  he  has  two  vetoes  over  the  candidates  running.   He 

'  See  p.  77. 


276  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

can  first  at  the  primary  lielp  vote  down  imdesirable  men 
in  his  own  party,  and  aid  in  the  endorsement  upon  his 
own  ticket  of  good  men  running  on  other  tickets,  and 
then,  at  the  general  election,  there  will  exist  no  need  for 
deserting  his  party  in  order  to  vote  for  good  men,  or  if  he 
sees  fit  to  do  so,  he  can  again  exercise  his  veto  power 
over  the  lists  of  his  party.  The  perfect  freedom  of  the 
voter  at  the  primary  will  tend  to  keep  the  party  intact 
at  the  general  election,  and  will  pave  the  way  for  success. 

Since  imder  a  complete  direct  primary  system  in- 
trigue, corruption,  bribery,  and  intimidation  will  bo 
greatly  reduced,  parties  will  be  able  to  win  out  only  by 
virtue  of  their  issues,  and  not  through  their  superior  or- 
ganization; party  leaders  will  no  longer  rise  to  power 
by  following  the  steps  of  a  Croker,  but  will  hare  to  rely 
upon  personal  merit.^  Thus  there  will  come  about  a 
greater  confidence  in  party  activity,  and  a  truer  devo- 
tion to  party  leaders,  which  will  build  the  fabric  of 
partisanship  close  and  strong. 

It  may  be  answered,  then,  to  the  question  put  at  the 
outset :  Will  the  direct  primary,  or  the  convention  sys- 
tem, best  maintain  an  effective  party  organization,  that 
Avhere  the  "machine"  rules,  the  direct  primary  is  supe- 
rior in  maintaining  an  effective  party  organization.  It 
provides  the  party  voter  wHh  representative  party  com- 
mittees. It  gives  him  a  platform  to  his  liking.  It  en- 
ables him  to  vote  for  the  men  of  his  choice.  He  is  satis- 
fied and  it  strengthens  his  party  affiliations.  Party  or- 
ganization, party  issues,  party  spirit,  party  candidates, 
will,  under  such  conditions,  be  of  a  higher,  better,  and 
truer  quality  than  under  a  convention  system. 

•  Prof.  John  R.  Commons,  Report  of  National  Conference  on  Practical  Reform 
of  Primary  Elections,  1898. 


CHAPTER  III. 

MINORITY  NOMINATIONS  UNDER  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

We  are  now  ready  to  consider  whether  the  direct  pri- 
mary or  the  convention  system  furnishes  the  best  nomi- 
nating machinery  through  which  an  effectively  organ- 
ized party  may  act  in  the  selection  of  its  candidates  for 
office.  For  the  sake  of  clearness  this  question  may  be 
discussed  under  three  heads:  (1)  Under  which  system 
will  the  men  nominated  be  more  thoroughly  representa- 
tive? This  involves  the  arguments  of  minority  repre- 
sentation; of  heavier  voting  at  the  primaries;  of  the 
power  of  corporations  and  of  "machines";  of  the  geo- 
graphical concentration  of  candidates;  of  the  rural 
versus  the  city  vote ;  of  the  double  veto  over  candidates ; 
and  of  the  power  of  the  press  and  deceptive  journalism. 
(2)  Under  which  plan  will  there  be  greater  equality  of 
opportunity  to  enter  the  public  service,  or  are  particular 
classes  favored  by  one  or  the  other  system  ?  Considera- 
tion will  be  made  of  the  poor  man ;  of  the  rich  man ;  of 
the  business  man ;  of  the  man  of  leisure ;  of  the  lover  of 
notoriety;  of  the  practical  politician,  etc.  (3)  Under 
which  system  will  a  higher  grade  of  men  be  put  in  office  ? 

In  the  first  place,  will  the  men  nominated  be  more 
thoroughly  representative  or  not?  Will  they  actually, 
or  only  apparently,  represent  a  larger  or  a  smaller  num- 
ber of  voters  ?  The  claim  against  the  direct  primary  is 
that  minority  nominations  would  be  increased ;  that  a 
larger  number  of  men  would  run  for  office,  and  the  vote 


278  Argument  of  the,  Direct  Primary. 

would  hence  be  scattered  among  numerous  individuals. 
The  easier  the  law  makes  it  for  an  aspirant  to  office 
to  get  his  name  put  on  the  primary  ballot,  the  more  likely 
is  it  that  he  will  run.    Direct  primary  laws  differ  widely 
as  to  such  requirements.     In  the  southern  States,  and 
generally  wherever  the  primaries  are  a  party  expense, 
any  candidate  may  have  his  name  printed  upon  the  pri- 
mary ballot,  if  he  has  paid  his  share  of  the  expense,  as 
assessed  by  the  party  executive  committee.-^     Such  pro- 
visions have,  however,  been  extremely  unpopular  with 
candidates.     In  other  cases  an  affidavit  of  hona  fide  in- 
tention to  run  is  required,  and  the  deposit  of  a  definite 
fee  fixed  by  law  either  as  a  uniform  sum,  say  ten  dol- 
lars;^ or  as  a  certain  percentage  of  the  salary  of  the 
office  for  which  the  candidate  runs;^  or  a  definite  sum 
graduated  according  to  the  importance  of  the  office.'* 
Another  method  is  the  filing  of  a  petition  or  "nomina- 
tion paper"  without  any  fee,'  while  in  still  other  cases 
both  nomination  papers  and  fees  are  required.     The 
latter  method  was  employed  under  the  Hennepin  county 
law  of  Minnesota,  and  was  incorporated  in  the  Oregon 
law  of  the  present  year.     In  both  cases  the  deposit  of  a 
fee  of  ten  dollars  was  required,  in  addition  to  the  filing 
of  a  nomination  paper  signed  by  at  least  five  per  cent, 
of  the  voters  of  the  party  in  the  proper  political  di- 
vision.^ 

'  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  Florida,  Alabama,  Kentucky,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Ten- 
nessee, etc. 
"  Missouri,  and  Minnesota  under  the  law  of  1899  in  addition   to  a  nomination 

paper. 

»  The  Maryland  bill  of  1901  and  the  North  Dakota  bill  of  the  same  year  re- 
quired as  a  fee  two  and  one-half  per  cent,  of  the  salary  of  the  office,  and  the 
CoUiy  bill  of  Michigan  but  one-half  of  one  per  cent. 

<  Minnesota  and  Michigan  laws  of  1901;  Hagemeister  and  Kreutzer  bills  of 
Wisconsin. 

» Indiana  law  of  1901,  and  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin. 

•  Similar  provisions  are  found  in  the  niinois  bill  of  1901. 


Minority  Nominations  Under  Direct  Primaries.     279 

The  question  now  is,  wliicli  of  tlicse  mcthocls  will 
bring  out  the  best  men.  The  deposit  of  an  oath  and  a  ten- 
dollar  fee  is  a  very  simple  process,  and  will  be  found 
convenient  by  honest  and  capable  men  of  means  who 
have  the  ready  cash,  and  who  object  to  going  out  before 
the  public  to  solicit  names.    But  it  would  prove  a  serious 
handicap  to  a  poor  man  of  ability  to  whom  ten  dollars 
is  a  considerable  item.     It  encourages  the  politicians  to 
put  up  numerous  "straw  candidates,"  bogus  men  who 
will  scatter  and  divert  the  vote.    It  creates  "scalawags" 
who  pay  their  fees  and  put  up  sham  runs,  only  to  be 
bought  off  by  those  candidates  whose  vote  they  would 
most  largely  cut  in  upon.  It  urges  the  "local  candidate," 
whose  strength  lies  within  a  narrow  area,  upon  the  ticket. 
From  all  these  sources,  therefore,  of  "straw  candidates," 
"scalawags,"  and  "local  candidates,"  the  requirement  of 
a  fee  alone  would  tend  to  increase  the  number  of  undesir- 
able candidates;  to  give  rise  to  more  decided  minority 
nominations ;  and  to  favor  the  man  of  means.     The  im- 
position of  a  fee  also  discriminates  against  all  weaker 
parties,  in  that  good  men  will  hesitate  in  coming  for- 
ward and  paying  their  fees  when  the  possibility  of  suc- 
cess is  slim,  or  defeat  inevitable. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  requirement  of  a  "nomination 
paper"  signed  by  a  certain  number  of  voters  would  not 
discriminate  against  the  poor  man.  It  would  be  im- 
possible for  the  "machine"  to  put  up  "straw  candi- 
dates." It  would  exclude  "local  candidates"  who 
could  not  get  a  sufficient  number  of  signatures  beyond 
the  narrow  limits  of  their  popularity.  There  would  be  no 
money  in  it  for  "scalawags."  It  would  defeat  the  aims 
of  these  political  parasites  by  making  it  impracticable 


280  Argument  of  the  Direct  Prhnary, 

to  waste  time  and  money  in  obtaining  signatures  for  the 
tmcertainty  of  being  bought  off  at  a  sufficient  premium 
above  the  expense  involved  to  make  it  worth  while.  It 
would  bring  the  candidates  in  closer  touch  with  the 
people,  and  would  arouse  a  more  general  and  a  deeper 
interest  in  nominations. 

Objection   is   made   against  the  use  of  nomination 
papers  upon  the  ground  that  it  compels  the  candidate 
to  go  out  begging  for  an  office ;  that  it  is  a  repulsi\'e  and 
disgraceful  undertaking  against  which  the  honest  pride 
and  self-respect  of  a  conscientious  man  rebels;  that  it 
encourages  "pestiferous  demagogTies,"  and  brazen-faced 
men  of  a  lower  type  of  character,  who  love  notoiiety, 
and  who  glory  at  the  sight  of  their  names  flaming  out 
in  the  wide  universe,  to  court  the  public  favor,  and  to 
get  chosen  to  office;  that  it  excludes  the  busy  man  of 
capacity  and  energy,  whom  lack  of  time  does  not  permit 
to  fool  away  days  just  for  the  sake  of  holding  office;  that 
after  all,  signatures  may  not  mean  much,  since  they  can 
be  bought  with  beer,  cash,  promise,  or  advantages  of  one 
kind  or  another ;  that  men  may  sign  for  pure  reasons  of 
friendship  or  favor,  or  "to  get  rid  of  the  fellow." 

To  say  that  by  forcing  a  candidate  to  go  out  soliciting 
subscriptions  for  a  nomination  paper,  the  man  is  re- 
quired to  seek  the  office,  instead  of  the  office  seeking  the 
man,  is  but  to  voice  a  flourishing  aphorism  which 
"soundeth  well  but  reasoneth  not."  Modesty  is  to  be 
encouraged  everywhere  and  at  all  times,  and  nowhere 
more  than  in  politics,  but  by  the  inevitable  law  of  neces- 
sity men  must  come  forward  and  present  themselves  as 
willing  to  serve  the  public,  and  then  let  the  people  decide 
as  to  their  fitness.    Good  men  would  rarely  get  a  chance 


Minority  Nominations  Under  Direct  Primaries.     281 

to  take  ofBce,  if  thej  were  to  wait  until  the  people  "dis- 
covered'' tliem,  and  drew  them  forth  to  serve.     A  man 
whose  modesty  forbids  him  to  come  forward  with  a  dig- 
nified and  manful  assertion  of  a  "God  given  right,"  to 
declare  his  intention  and  willingness  to  hold  office,  and 
to  take  the  legal  steps  which  lead  to  public  honor,  does 
not  deserve  such  an  honor  under  any  system  of  nomina- 
tion.   It  is  the  man  who  seeks  the  office  who  is  getting  it 
•under  the  present  system,  who  got  it  in  the  past,  and 
who  must  always  get  it.    It  is  he  who  has  most  friends 
pushing  him  in  the  caucuses  and  in  the  convention  who 
wins  out.     It  is  true  that  at  present  it  is  not  necessary 
for  a  candidate  to  go  out  himself.     He  may  leave  the 
conduct  of  his  campaign  to  friends  or  to  professional 
politicians.    But  what  objection  is  there  to  his  going  out 
himself  as  far  as  this  may  be  necessary,  when  in  doing 
so  he  is  but  complying  with  a  good  law.    If  it  is  no  dis- 
grace to  hold  office,  then  it  can  be  no  disgrace  to  wish  to 
hold  office,  and  to  declare  that  wish  in  accordance  with 
law. 

Moreover,  in  our  own  State  of  Wisconsin  nominations 
for  the  high  offices  of  judge  of  the  supreme  court  and 
judge  of  the  circuit  court  have  for  years  back  been  made 
by  petitions  circulated  throughout  the  State  without  any 
lowering  of  the  good  character  and  high  ability  of  the 
men  who  compose  our  supreme  and  circuit  courts.  If 
it  is  no  disgrace — and  the  idea  that  it  is  does  not  seem 
to  have  struck  anybody  in  particular  but  demagogues — 
for  candidates  to  a  seat  on  the  supreme  bench,  to  solicit 
signatures  to  petitions,  then  it  certainly  ought  not  to  be 
such  for  any  other  position  in  the  gift  of  the  people  of 
the  State.    Undoubtedly  many  good  men  who  refuse  to 


282  Argument  of  the  Direct  Frimm'y. 

run  for  office  at  present  because  of  tlie  disreputaLle  and 
suspicious  macliinations  which  surround  so  many  nomi- 
nations, and  cast  their  dark  reflection  upon  the  nomi- 
nees, would  be  glad  to  come  forward  and  file  their  nomi- 
nation papers  in  accordance  with  law. 

The  use  of  a  petition  instead  of  a  fee  would  also  re- 
move all  discriminations  against  the  weaker  parties.  If 
anything,  it  would  favor  the  weaker  party,  in  that  the 
number  of  signatures  required  decreases  with  party 
strength,  and  eases  the  way  to  a  nomination.  It  would 
be  pre-eminently  fair  to  parties,  as  well  as  to  candidates, 
in  that  it  would  reduce  money  distinctions  and  party 
superiority  to  a  minimum. 

The  practice  of  requiring  both  fee  and  petition,  while 
it  seems  to  have  met  with  considerable  success,  does  not 
seem  as  expedient  as  a  petition  alone.  It  is  to  be  ques- 
tioned whether  the  advantages  arising  from  the  possible 
prevention  from  candidacy  of  weak  and  fraudulent  men 
through  a  fee,  would  counterbalance  the  disadvantages 
of  a  discrimination  against  the  poorer  candidates  as  well 
as  against  the  weaker  parties.  If  the  fee  is  exacted  as 
a  matter  of  state  economy,  it  cannot  be  defended  very 
well,  for  the  State  would  be  taxing  a  certain  class  (its 
prospective  servants)  in  the  exercise  of  a  right  (to  run 
for  an  office)  which  is  essentially  the  initiatory  step  in 
the  service  of  all  the  people,  and  which  in  case  of  de- 
feated candidates,  takes  the  form  of  a  pure  sacrifice  to 
public  interests  that  ought  not  to  be  demanded.  The  ex- 
pense of  conducting  a  primary  election  is  essentially  a 
part  of  the  expense  of  conducting  a  general  election,^ 

"  Tn  Spier  v.  Baker,  120  Cal.  308,  a  primary  election  was  declared  to  bo  "  an 
election  authorized  by  law,'"  beuce  coming  under  the  Constitution.    See  p.  374. 


Minority  Nominations  Under  Direct  Primaries.     283 

and  tliis,  in  turn,  is  a  part  of  tlie  necessary  expense  of 
government,  which,  as  we  all  admit,  must  he  borne  by  all 
the  people  through  the  equitable  taxation  of  all  interests 
protected,  and  not  by  a  particular  class.  Upon  these 
grounds  it  seems  tliat  a  provision  in  law  requiring  a  fee, 
the  express  purpose  of  which  is  to  help  defray  the  ex- 
pense of  holding  a  primary  election,  might  be  declared 
unconstitutional,  while  if  its  express  and  ruling  purpose 
could  be  proven  to  be  that  of  excluding  the  candidature 
of  weak  men,  it  might  probably  stand. 

"We  may  now  turn  to  si:>ccific  facts  in  the  case.  Do 
direct  primaries  increase  the  nmnber  of  candidates  ? 
And  how  does  the  requirement  of  a  fee,  or  a  petition,  or 
a  fee  and  a  petition,  affect  their  number  ?  In  Jackson 
county,  Kansas,  where  a  fee  alone  is  required,  twenty- 
seven  candidates  ran  for  eight  offices  in  the  primary  of 
1895,  which  is  an  average  of  three  and  a  half  candi- 
dates for  each  office.  For  one  office,  that  of  sheriff,  there 
were  nine  candidates,^  so  that  the  average  for  the  other 
seven  places  was  about  two  and  one-half. 

At  the  direct  primaries  of  Cleveland,^  Ohio,  in  1898, 
where  only  petitions  were  required,  but  twelve  candi- 
dates ran  for  six  offices,  or  an  average  of  two  candidates 
per  office,  showing  that  on  the  basis  of  averages  it  was 
even  an  all  around  majority  election.  Only  one  candi- 
date ran  for  each  of  three  offices,  and  all  three  received 
the  full  party  vote.  For  one  office  there  were  two  candi- 
dates, the  winner  receiving  seven-ninths  of  the  votes; 
and  for  another,   three,  the  winner  obtaining  almost 

'  The  winner  had  a  decided  lead,  and  at  the  ensuing  election  received  the  full 
party  vote,  showing  that  a  complete  reconciliation  had  been  effected. 
*  Ward  19,  precinct  A. 


284:  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

three-seventlis  of  the  votes.  In  other  words,  minority 
nominations  were  made  in  but  two  offices,  and  there 
only  by  a  few  votes. 

At  the  Hennepin  county,  Minnesota,  primaries  h&ld 
September  18,  1900,  under  a  system  where  both  peti- 
tions and  fees  were  required,  thirty-nine  candidates  ran 
for  twelve  offices,  excluding  the  fifteen  city  offices,  for 
M'^hich  there  were  thirty-four  aspirants.  The  former 
averaged  three  and  a  fourth  per  office,  and  the  latter  but 
two  and  one-fifth.  Out  of  the  first  set  of  twelve  offices, 
there  were  six  majority  nominations,  including  member 
of  congress,  county  attorney,  county  treasurer,  county 
surveyor,  coroner,  and  judge  of  probate.  More  remark- 
able still  was  the  result  in  the  city  primaries,  where  out 
of  fifteen  offices,  twelve  majority  nominations  were 
made. 

That  majority  nominations  are  common  under  direct 
primaries  has  also  been  demonstrated  by  long  experience 
in  South  Carolina,  Mississippi,  and  Lincoln,  Nebraska, 
where,  if  necessary,  second  primaries  are  held  to  secure 
majority  nominations,  and  the  vote  is  confined  to  the 
two  candidates  for  each  office  who  received  the  highest 
plurality  vote  at  the  first  primary.  It  has  been  ascer- 
tained on  good  authority,  that  second  primaries  are  sel- 
dom necessary,  and  that  the  provision  is  satisfactory, 
although  candidates  with  justice  oppose  it,  because  of 
the  expense  involved. 

The  ex})erience  in  Wisconsin  in  the  nomination  of 
judges  by  petition  also  goes  to  prove  that  the  number 
of  men  who  try  for  nominations  is  by  no  means  greatly 
increased  where  everybody  otherwise  qualified  has  the 
privilege  of  being  voted  for  at  the  election  after  filing 


Minority  Nominations  Under  Direct  Primaries.     285 

the  properly  signed  petition.  "The  positions  as  judges 
are  very  desirable  ones,  and  many  men  wish  the  honor, 
yet  there  are  seldom  over  three  candidates  at  any  such 
election."  ^ 

Eut  even  though  we  concede  what  past  experience  with 
direct  primaries  in  many  cases  seems  to  disprove,  that 
the  number  of  candidates  in  the  field  would  be  in- 
creased, it  can  by  no  means  be  concluded  from  this,  that 
plurality  nominations  would  be  more  pronounced,  or 
that  the  successful  candidates  would  more  frequently 
fail  of  a  majority,  or  represent  a  smaller  minority  than 
at  present.  Even  though  we  admit  that  where  to-day 
there  are  three  candidates  running  for  an  office  there 
would  be  four  or  five  under  a  direct  primary,  the  suc- 
cessful candidate  among  the  latter  would  not  necessarily 
represent  a  smaller  constituency  than  does  the  winner 
among  the  former,  for  experience  has  shown  that  the 
turn-out  of  voters  is  so  much  larger  at  direct  than  at 
indirect  primaries,  that  the  actual  number  of  votes  cast 
for  the  winning  candidate  would  generally  be  very  much 
greater  than  that  which  would  be  cast  for  a  candidate 
under  the  present  system.  In  other  words,  the  increase 
in  the  number  of  voters  who  attend  the  primaries  would 
more  than  compensate  for  any  possible  increase  in  the 
number  of  candidates. 

That  the  direct  primaries  do  arouse  a  more  gen- 
eral interest,  and  draw  a  larger  attendance  at  the  polls, 
seems  to  have  been  found  almost  universally  true.  At 
the  Scranton  county  Eepublican  primaries  of  1900,  over 
14,000  votes  were  cast,  which  is  within  1,000  votes  of 

»  Address  of  W.  D.  Corrigan,  Waushara  Co.,  Wis.,  before  the  Wisconsin  legis- 
lature in  1901. 


286  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

l)elng  the  total  Eepublican  strength  of  the  county.^  In 
Cleveland,  Ohio,  under  the  convention  plan,  5,173  votes 
were  cast  at  the  Republican  primaries,  in  1892.  The 
next  year  under  direct  primaries  14,123  votes  were 
cast;  in  1896,  23,965;  and  at  the  spring  primary  in 
1899,  28,000.  All  this  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  pri- 
maries were  not  held  on  registration  day,  which  would 
undoubtedly  have  increased  the  turn-out.  Even  if  in 
1893  the  number  of  candidates  in  Cleveland  had  been 
double  what  it  was  under  the  convention  system  in  the 
preceding  year,  the  actual  number  of  votes  represented 
by  the  winning  candidates  would  still  have  been  much 
larger  in  1893,  since  almost  three  times  as  many  votes 
were  cast  at  that  time. 

In  Louisville,  Kentucky,  the  vote  in  the  Democratic 
primary  is  generally  almost  equivalent  to  the  entire 
Democratic  registry.  "On  one  occasion  when  only 
about  22,000  Democrats  registered  as  Democrats  in  the 
regular  registration,  and  there  voted  about  19,000  per- 
sons, ninety  per  cent,  of  the  Democrats  voted  in  the 
primary."  ^  In  Minnesota  "the  question  of  attendance 
was  settled  forever"  by  the  fact  that  over  32,000  people 
voted  at  the  first  direct  primary  held  in  1900.  This  was 
more  than  the  entire  vote  cast  at  the  preceding  election 
for  governor.  Even  the  most  ardent  advocate  of  direct 
nominations  had  not  anticipated  such  an  enormous  at- 
tendance. If  there  is  any  absolute  statement  which  the 
writer  is  ready  to  make  respecting  any  argument  bear- 
ing upon  direct  primaries,  it  is  that  the  direct  vote  sys- 

>  Arthur  Dunn  in  "  Messenger,"  South  Wayne,  March  7,  1901. 
«McDermottof  Kentucky  at  National  Conference  on  Primary  Election  Re- 
form.   N.  Y..  1898. 


Minority  Nominations  Under  Direct  Primaries.     287 

tern  does  bring  out  a  very  much  larger  vote.  Everywhere 
facts  eonfinnatorj  of  this  contention  have  been  found. 
The  significance  of  this  becomes  more  profound  when 
we  recall  that  in  some  of  our  cities  less  than  thirty  per 
cent,  of  the  voters  go  to  the  polls,  and  in  twenty-four 
of  the  larger  cities  barely  half  of  the  voters  vote;  that 
the  stay-at-home  vote  in  Pennsylvania  increased  from 
T0,000  in  1888,  to  610,000  in  1895 ;  in  K'ew  York  from 
Y5,000  to  510,000;  in  Massachusetts  from  80,000  to 
230,000 ;  and  in  Ohio  from  40,000  to  180,000.^ 

In  the  face  of  these  figures,  the  force  of  the  conten- 
tion must  be  admitted,  that  even  though  we  concede, 
what  facts  in  many  cases  contradict,  that  the  number 
of  candidates  is  generally  greater  under  direct  primaries 
than  under  the  convention  plan,  it  does  not  follow  that 
the  actual  number  of  voters  represented  by  the  successful 
candidates  is  smaller  than  under  the  present  system; 
but  that  with  the  great  increase  in  the  total  vote  cast  at 
the  primary,  our  nominees  will  tend  to  represent  a 
larger  constituency;  minority  nominations  will  be  less 
pronounced;  the  candidates  will  he  more  representative 
men. 

The  argument  of  minority  nomination  is  sometimes 
advanced  as  though  it  applied  only  to  the  direct  vote 
system.  It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  days 
of  majority  nomination  or  election  as  required  by  law, 
have  long  passed.^  The  time  was,  before  the  develop- 
ment of  our  present  nominating  machinery,  when  our 
forefathers  required  a  majority  election,  and  balloted 

'  Pomeroy,  Eltweed,  Doorway  of  Reform,  Arena,  AprU,  1897. 
*  Majority  nominations  are  required  in  South  Carolina,  Mississippi,  and  Lin- 
coln, Nebraska. 


288  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

a  goodly  number  of  times  to  attain  tliat  result.  But  that 
age  has  gone.  Life  and  necessity  have  demanded  new 
methods,  and  to-day  minority  nomination  would  prob- 
ably be  found  more  frequent  than  that  by  the  majority 
if  the  investigation  lent  itself  to  statistical  research. 
T\Tiere  the  "machine"  controls  politics,  minority  nomi- 
nations of  the  most  despicable  and  emphasized  fonn 
prevail.  We  have  it  in  the  caucuses,  where  "machine 
slates"  are  carried  upon  preconcerted  plans.  We  have  it 
in  the  conventions,  where  votes  are  bought  and  sold; 
where  the  wishes  of  the  people  are  ignored,  and  delegated 
votes  are  traded  out  to  him  who  offers  the  most  in  re- 
turn; where  a  "machine"  chairman  presides,  and 
carries  nominations  for  the  politicians  by  his  perception 
of  the  volume  of  sound  when  the  vote  is  taken;  where 
a  "dark  horse"  of  whom  the  people  had  not  heard,  and 
whom  the  delegates  do  not  know,  is  sprung  by  some 
political  orator,  and  nominated  in  the  midst  of  frenzied 
excitement — where  such  proceedings  obtain,  we  need 
not  listen  for  the  voice  of  the  people.  It  is  lost — 
drowned  out  by  a  narrow  circle  of  shrewd  politicians. 
Can  there  be  worse  minority  nominations  ? 

It  is  sometimes  argued  that  at  conventions  delegates 
have  a  first  and  second  choice,  and  that  nominations  are 
by  majority.  The  first  Lud  second  choice  is  a  most 
fruitful  source  of  "trades,"  while  the  majority  vote  is 
by  no  means  always  an  indication  of  the  real  wishes 
of  a  majority  of  the  party.  The  delegates  generally 
vote  to  get  a  majority.  One  writer  declares  the  direct 
vote  system  impracticable  because  it  allows  minority 
nominations.^    These  minorities,  he  says,  result  because 

» How  to  Reform  the  Primary  System,  Arena,  June,  1897. 


Minority  Ifominations  Under.  Direct  Primaries.     289 

"the  voter  casts  his  ballot  in  the  dark  without  knowing 
the  reasonable  probability  of  the  result."  In  other 
words,  he  regrets  that  the  voter,  under  such  a  system, 
cannot  foretell  the  result,  and  then  vote  for  the  sake  of 
a  result,  for  the  sake  of  a  majority,  instead  of  for  the 
man.  This,  he  goes  on,  can  be  accomplished  at  a  con- 
vention where  "the  paramount  purpose  is  to  get  a 
majority!"  There  "enough  of  the  future  can  be  fore- 
seen to  guard  against  weak  nominations,"  and  delegates 
are  free  under  a  "second  choice"  to  jump  into  the  "band- 
wagon" with  the  "head  man"  and  thus  help  make  up 
the  "indispensable,  and  much  desired  majority."  Such 
majorities  mean  nothing,  and  at  best  but  arouse  the 
suspicion  of  defeated  candidates  and  of  the  thwarted 
people.  Far  better  is  the  minority  nomination  at  the 
direct  primary,  where  voters  and  candidates  know  that 
their  strength  is  represented  in  the  results,  and  that  they 
have  been  squarely  beaten  in  a  fair  fight. 

In  our  elections,  also,  minorities  frequently  rule.  In 
Wisconsin,  Governors  Rusk,  Hoard,  Smith,  and  Peck 
were  elected  by  a  minority  which  was  from  1,700  to 
10,000  votes  short  of  a  majority.  "All  the  presidents 
of  the  United  States  since  Grant,  saving  alone  McKin- 
ley,  were  elected  by  a  minority  vote."^  Here  is  proof 
that  after  all  minority  decisions  are  the  rule  rather 
than  the  exception  under  our  present  system,  and  cannot 
be  advanced  as  an  exclusive  argument  against  the  direct 
vote  system.  This  fact  of  minority  nominations  must 
be  looked  upon  as  an  unfortunate  but  irremediable  con- 
dition  of   American   politics,    which   is   often   greatly 

>  Address  of  H,  W.  Chynoweth  before  Joint  Committee  on  Privileges  and  Elec- 
tions. 

19 


290  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary, 

aggravated  by  the  convention  system,  and  whicli  will 
tend  to  be  ameliorated  by  giving  every  voter  a  direct 
voice  in  non»nations. 

The  elimination  of  minority  nominations  is  very  de- 
sirable, and  might  be  attained  through  the  expression 
of  a  first  and  second  choice  ^  where  more  than  two  candi- 
dates run  for  office ;  or  by  a  majority  nomination  through 
a  second  primary  election.  The  second  choice  method  is 
very  simple  and  effective  and  deserving  of  a  trial. 
Where  there  are  more  than  two  candidates,  the  voter 
places  the  figure  "1"  opposite  the  name  of  his  first 
choice,  and  a  "2"  opposite  that  of  his  second  choice.  If 
no  candidate  receives  a  majority  of  first  choice  votes, 
then  the  one  receiving  the  largest  number  of  first  and 
second  choices  becomes  the  nominee,  or  under  the  Rem- 
sen  method  of  canvassing  the  returns,  the  one  who  jirst 
receives  a  majority  of  first  and  second  choices.  The  can- 
vassing of  the  votes  would  not  be  as  complicated  or  as 
troublesome  as  a  first  thought  might  suggest.  There 
is  a  tendency  to  view  with  suspicion  results  where  the 
possibility  of  mathematical  jugglery  seems  to  enter,  but 
there  really  is  no  good  reason  why  returns  should  not 
be  accurately  and  honestly  made  in  a  canvass  involving 
some  additional  figuring. 

The  simplicity  and  economy  of  the  Remsen  scheme 
recommend  it  very  highly.  If  no  candidate  receives 
a  first  choice  majority  vote,  then  the  ballots  cast  for  the 
lowest  candidate  on  the  list,  are  assorted  with  reference 
to  second  choices  for  the  remaining  candidates.  If  none 
then  receives  a  majority  of  first  and  second  choice  ballots 

'  Suggested  by  Remsen,  in  "  Primary  Elections;  "  by  Gov.  La  FoUette,  in  his 
message  of  January,  1901,  and  others. 


Minority  Nominations  Under  Direct  Primaries.     291 

a  similar  assortment  of  the  ballots  of  the  lowest  remain- 
ing candidates  is  made  on  the  basis  of  second  choices, 
and  added  to  the  votes  of  the  other  candidates,  and  so 
on  until  some  candidate  has  a  majority  of  first  and 
second  choices.  For  example,  the  first  choice  canvass 
gives  A  seven  votes,  B  twenty,  and  C  eighteen.  Since 
no  one  has  a  majority,  the  ballots  cast  for  A  who  is  the 
lowest  candidate  on  the  list,  are  sorted  for  second  choice, 
and  it  is  found  that  six  give  C  a  second  choice,  and  one, 
B.  This  gives  C  twenty-four  first  and  second  choices, 
and  B  twenty-one,  and  hence  gives  C  the  nomination. 

It  will  be  noticed  that,  under  this  method,  it  generally 
will  not  be  necessary  to  canvass  the  entire  second  choice 
vote  in  order  to  get  at  the  result.  It  prevents  the  lowest 
candidate  on  the  first  choice  canvass  from  getting  the 
nomination  on  second  choices.  It  gives  the  first  choice 
vote  a  greater  importance  than  the  second,  which  is  not 
the  case  when  the  candidate  who  gets  the  largest  ma- 
jority of  first  and  second  choices  is  nominated  after  a 
canvass  of  the  entire  first  and  second  choice  votes  cast. 
It  gives  the  candidate  most  desired  by  most  of  the  voters 
the  nomination. 

Another  way  of  overcoming  minority  nominations, 
is  by  requiring  the  holding  of  second  primaries  at  which 
only  the  two  highest  candidates  for  those  offices,  for 
which  no  majority  nominations  were  made,  are  to  re- 
ceive votes.  In  three  States,  South  Carolina,  Missis- 
sippi, and  ISTebraska,  this  method  has  been  used.  In 
Mississippi  the  majority  rule  applies  unless  by  previous 
agreement  of  all  candidates  a  plurality  vote  is  to  nomi- 
nate.   It  has  several  disadvantages  over  the  second  choice 


292  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

plan.  It  is  not  as  economical.  It  consumes  much  time. 
It  makes  much  trouble,  and  unnecessarily  increases  the 
voter's  duties.  And  finally,  the  choice  at  the  second  pri- 
mary is  not  free,  but  is  limited  to  two  candidates.  All 
the  inconveniences  of  a  second  primary  might  be  avoided 
by  allowing  the  voter  to  express  his  second  choice  at  the 
first  primary. 


CHAPTEK  IV. 

THE  "MACHINE"  AND  THE  CORPORATION   UNDER  DI- 
RECT PRIMARIES. 

As  long  as  politics  is  politics  and  men  are  men,  there 
will  be  "pestiferous  demagogues,"  "professional  poli- 
ticians," "political  machines,"  "bosses,"  "rings," 
"heelers,"  and  all  the  other  instrumentalities  employed 
for  the  concentration  of  power  in  politics  and  for  the  con- 
trol of  political  activity.  The  question  is,  under  what 
system  of  nomination  will  these  forces  of  evil  be  least 
active  and  their  political  power  most  nearly  eliminated. 
It  is  claimed  that  the  direct  vote  system  does  not  deprive 
the  "machine"  of  its  power,  and  that  it  gives  corpora- 
tions a  greater  influence  over  nominations  than  they  pos- 
sess under  the  convention.  Before  going  into  the  details 
of  this  argument  it  may  be  well,  for  the  sake  of  clear- 
ness, to  take  a  general  view  of  the  relation  which  the 
"machines"  and  the  corporations  bear  to  politics,  as  well 
as  to  each  other. 

The  corporation,  unlike  the  "machine"  with  which  it 
co-operates,  exercises  most  of  its  direct  influence  in  pol- 
itics after  election  rather  than  before.  That  this  should 
be  the  case  is  natural.  Both  of  these  organizations  act 
in  self-interest.  The  "machine"  tries  to  win  false  glory 
and  make  money  primarily  out  of  politics ;  hence,  it  aims 
at  the  control  of  our  nominating  and  election  machinery 
in  order  that  it  may  sell  its  power  of  placing  men  in  of- 
fice, or  may  gain  direct  access  to  the  public  treasury. 
The  corporation  aims  to  make  money  primarily  out  of 


294:  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

some  particular  line  of  business,  and  only  aftemj)ts  the 
control  of  political  action  where  an  effort  is  being  made, 
or  is  to  be  made,  by  the  public  through  some  department 
of  government  to  interfere  with  its  interests,  its  profits, 
and  its  free  operation.^  Corporations,  therefore,  have 
no  incentive  to  enter  politics  before  election,  except 
where  it  is  known  that  certain  officers  through  whom 
public  control  is  to  be  exercised  over  them,  or  who  may 
serve  them  by  enlarging  their  special  privileges,  are 
about  to  be  elected.  It  is  but  natural  that  they  should 
then  strive  to  secure  the  election  of  men  who  are  favor- 
able to  their  interests.  But  even  this  does  not  always 
follow  because  of  the  greater  convenience  and  economy 
with  which  the  necessary  number  of  public  officers  may 
frequently  be  corrupted  after  election,  as  in  the  notorious 
instance  of  our  legislators.  This  work  of  corruption  is 
greatly  facilitated  by  "machine"  politics  which  plays 
into  the  hands  of  corporations  through  the  election  of 
weak  men.  The  relation  between  corporations  and  "ma- 
chines" is  in  many  cases  so  close  as  to  make  a  distinction 
between  the  corrupt  activities  of  the  one  and  of  the  other 

>  The  theory  which  explains  the  interference  of  corporations  and  trusts  in  pol- 
itics is  clearly  set  forth  by  Prof.  R.  T.  Ely,  in  "  Monopolies  and  Trusts,"  page 
259.  "  The  individual  and  social  benefits  of  private  property  come  largely  as 
the  result  of  a  free  hand  in  its  manaj'  iment.  But  in  the  public  control  of  private 
property,  we  retain  private  property,  and  yet  take  away  from  it  that  measure 
of  control  which  is  one  of  its  natural  incidents.  It  is  a  very  serious  question 
whether  these  two  antagonistic  principles  can  thus  be  reconciled.  One  inevi- 
table result  is  a  struggle  of  interests,  with  consequent  political  corruption  and 
class  arrayed  against  class.  Those  whose  private  property  it  is  attempted  to 
control  are  bound  to  resist  the  attempted  control,  which,  however  just  it  may 
be,  they  will  regard  us  unjust;  and  to  resist  it  means  to  enter  politics  in  order  to 
control  those  agencies  which  are  designed  to  control  them.  In  this  way  we  have 
the  most  powerful  classes  using  politics  to  promote  their  private  ends."  It  may 
be  added  that  corporations  often  are  not /orced  into  politics  to  resist  attempted 
public  regulation,  but  that  they  take  the  aggressive  and  «ee&  the  control  of  leg- 
islation for  private  ends. 


The  ^^ Machine''^  and  the  Corporation.        295 

extremely  difficult.  However,  it  is  undoubtedly  true 
that  in  general,  the  "machine"  lays  the  foundation  for 
further  corruption  by  corporations  through  the  election 
of  weak  men.^  Hence,  it  is  our  political  system  which 
enables  corporations  and  trusts  to  exercise  baneful  in- 
fluences in  politics  that  we  must  condemn,  rather  than 
the  corporations  and  trusts  which  avail  themselves  of 
the  opportunity  offered,  while  acting  under  a  most  nat- 
ural impulse  of  self-interest.  It  is  not  alone  the  wicked- 
ness of  our  great  American  business  interests,  but  the 
wickedness  of  American  politics,  and  the  weakness  of 
political  institutions,  that  lies  at  the  bottom  of  our  cor- 
rupt corporation  power  in  government.  The  remedy  is 
not  found  in  the  destruction  of  trusts  and  the  maiming  of 
corporations,  but  in  the  improvement  of  our  methods  in 
politics  and  the  furtherance  of  a  better  understanding 
between  the  public  and  our  large  corporate  interests.^ 
The  corrupt  influences  of  corporations  in  politics  to- 

>  Jencks  (J.  W.),  The  Trust  Problem,  p.  193. 

'  An  illustration  of  this  is  found  in  a  proposed  system  of  advisory  coimcils  in 
railroad  administration  through  which  the  public  may  be  brought  into  a  better 
understanding  with  our  great  railroad  corporations.  The  aim  of  the  suggested 
plan  is:  "  to  represent  aU  the  varied  interests  of  our  population  in  an  advinory 
capacity  in  the  conduct  of  our  railways.  These  coimcils  are  to  be  clearing- 
houses of  information,  through  which  the  railways  and  the  public  wiU  learn  to 
known  each  other's  interests  better,  and  through  which  the  material  interests  of 
both  of  these  great  parties  will  be  built  up  in  accordance  with  principles  of  jus- 
tice and  equity.  Every  attempt  to  interfere  in  the  purely  business  management 
of  a  railway  should  be  resisted;  but  every  attempt  on  the  part  of  a  railway  to 
disregard  the  just  rights  of  the  public  should  likewise  be  promptly  checked  and 
thoroughly  ventilated  in  the  councils."    .    .    . 

"  The  council  system,  as  proposed,  fits  into  the  present  order  of  things.  There 
is  nothing  radical  or  disorganizing  about  it.  It  simply  aims  to  bring  together 
into  one  harmonious  system  the  various  isolated  independent  efforts  which  have 
long  been  made  by  many  railways  in  the  United  States  and  by  private  organiza- 
tions. It  aims  to  do  systematically  and  well  what  is  now  attempted  without 
system,  in  a  manner  more  or  less  one-sided."  Prof.  Balthasar  H.  Meyer,  "  Ad- 
visory Councils  in  Railway  Administration,"  in  Annals  of  the  American  Acad- 
emy of  PoUtical  and  Social  Science,  Vol.  XIX,  p.  74  (Jan.,  1903). 


296  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

day  are  greater  than  in  tlie  past,  not  only  because  there 
are  more  and  larger  corporations,  but  because  politics 
concerns  itself  more  with  these  corporations  and  because 
these  corporations,  at  present,  concern  themselves  more 
with  politics.  The  modem  era  of  industrial  progress  is 
an  era  of  organization,  of  consolidation,  of  concentra- 
tion. Combinations  of  capital  for  the  protection  and 
promotion  of  private  interests  representing  millions  of 
dollars  are  being  consummated  every  day.  So  powerful 
are  these  interests  in  many  cases  as  to  threaten  the  gen- 
eral welfare  and  to  demand  the  intervention  of  the  State, 
which,  as  was  seen,  is  always  desperately  resisted.  At- 
tempts at  judicious  public  regulation  of  great  corporate 
interests  are  repeatedly  being  frustrated,  it  is  true,  by 
the  corporation  agent's  subtle  money  power,  but  the  rem- 
edy is  not  found  in  the  prosecution  of  a  foolish  war  of 
extermination  resulting  in  the  crippling  of  corporations, 
which  take  a  most  natural  advantage  of  the  weaknesses 
of  our  political  system,  but  rather  in  the  improvement 
of  our  machinery  for  the  selection  of  public  oflBcers  and 
in  its  adaptation  to  the  severe  requirements  of  modern 
progressive  life.  The  money  king  has  come  to  stay.  He 
cannot  be  destroyed  and  must  be  subjected. 

The  claim  is  made  against  direct  primaries  that  they 
will  give  corporate  interusts  considerable  power,  even 
to  the  extent  of  dictating  nominations;  that  instances 
may  occur  where  nominations  are  effected  by  bare  plu- 
ralities, and  where  a  comparatively  small  number  of 
votes  may  decide  one  way  or  the  other ;  that  a  corporation 
may  possess  the  decisive  votes,  since  it  has  the  money, 
the  "backing,"  and  may  control  a  large  number  of  em- 
ployes whom  it  can  secretly,  quickly,  and  thoroughly 


The  "  Machine  "  and  the  Corjyoration.         297 

organize  in  favor  of  some  candidate  throiigh  the  threat 
of  being  "put  out  of  a  job."  Admitting  the  bare  pos- 
sibility of  dictation,  numerous  limitations  to  such  a  cor- 
rupt exercise  of  power  are  at  once  apparent.  There 
must  be  an  unscrupulous  corporation  willing  to  make 
the  attempt.  There  must  be  a  sufficient  number  of  em- 
ployes so  scattered  in  the  various  election  precincts  in 
which  they  are  registered  and  in  which  alone  they  can 
vote,  to  make  their  ballots  decisive  for  the  particular 
office  for  which  dictation  is  attempted.  There  must  be 
the  right  kind  of  a  candidate,  and  a  sufficiently  small  plu- 
rality. A  closed  primary  system  of  voting  requiring  a 
declaration  of  party  affiliation,  must  be  in  operation  so 
as  to  enable  the  corporation  to  hold  its  employes  respon- 
sible for  their  vote.  Under  an  open  direct  primary  sys- 
tem where  secret  balloting  is  allowed,  dictation  would 
be  out  of  the  question,  since  it  would  be  impossible  to  tell 
how  the  voter  ballots.  With  greater  ease  can  a  nomina- 
tion be  dictated  under  the  caucus  and  convention  sys- 
tem, where  upon  preconcerted  plan  the  employes  can 
"pack"  a  caucus,  control  its  action,  and  elect  delegates 
to  suit.  It  is  apparent,  therefore,  that  even  though  a 
corporation  should  desire  to  dictate  a  nomination,  it 
could  not  do  so  at  all  under  an  open  primary  system,  and 
could  do  so  only  in  rare  instances  under  a  closed  primary 
system. 

But  even  the  desire  to  dictate  a  nomination  would  gen- 
erally be  absent.  It  was  probably  made  plain  in  the 
opening  discussion  of  this  chapter  that  corporations  do 
not  aim  at  "little  game"  in  politics.  Their  object,  where 
they  enter  politics  at  all,  is,  as  has  been  pointed  out, 
to  resist  public  regulation,  or  to  secure  the  enactment 


298  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

of  special  legislation  for  tlie  promotion  of  their  private 
interests.  This  cannot  be  accomplished  through  the  dicta- 
tion of  a  single  nomination  here  and  there.  It  requires 
the  control  of  an  entire  legislature,  which,  it  seems, 
would  he  utterly  impossible  through  the  dictation  of 
plurality  nominations  under  the  most  favorable  condi- 
tions. Any  objection  to  direct  primaries  upon  the 
ground  that  they  increase  the  power  of  corporations  in 
dictating  nominations  appears  preposterous  in  the  light 
of  reason,  and  is  undeserving  of  serious  reflection.  In 
no  way,  does  it  seem,  can  this  argument  be  considered 
of  determining  importance  in  deciding  the  practicability 
of  nominations  by  direct  vote. 

It  is  also  claimed  that  the  direct  vote  system  does  not 
deprive  the  "machine"  of  its  power,  but  enables  it  to 
concentrate  its  vote  upon  one  candidate,  and  to  nominate 
him — probably  by  a  bare  plurality  vote,  while  the  op- 
position to  "machine-rule"  is  divided  among  a  number 
of  candidates.  Possibly  there  might  be  cases  where 
this  could  happen,  but  in  order  to  succeed,  the  "machine" 
would  have  to  deceive  a  great  mass  of  voters  by  secret, 
underlianded  means,  because  the  divulgence  of  the  plot 
would  put  the  voters  on  their  guard,  and  would  defeat 
the  attempt.  Proper  secrecy  would  be  difficult  to  main- 
tain because  of  the  large  number  of  persons  involved 
wh(j>  are  neither  the  moving  "machine"  spirits,  nor  their 
cringing  "heelers,"  but  auxiliary  voting  material  which 
must  necessarily  be  brought  in  if  the  attempt  is  to  be  at 
all  successful.  It  requires  more  than  a  narrow  active 
clique,  such  as  could  easily  control  a  caucus,  or  a  conven- 
tion, to  control  a  primary  election,  because  at  the  direct 
primary,  organization,  which  to-day  wins,  would  count 


The  '•'■  Machine''''  and  the  Corporation.        299 

for  little.  It  is  numbers,  adual  votes,  wliicli  alone  could 
win  the  day  in  the  face  of  opposition  which  has  an  equal 
chance.  If  the  "machine"  attempts  an  open  fight,  it 
exposes  itself  to  counter  combinations,  and  almost  cer- 
tain defeat,  as  was  demonstrated  in  Scranton,  Penn.,  in 
Lincoln,  E'ebraska,  in  Cleveland,  Ohio,  in  Louisville, 
Kentucky,  in  Minneapolis,  Minnesota,  and  elsewhere. 
The  direct  nomination  records  show  that  "machine"  can- 
didates have  almost  invariably  been  turned  down  at  the 
polls  when  an  open  fight  was  made.^  To  deceive  the 
public  is  difficult.  "Yon  may  fool  some  of  the  people 
some  of  the  time,  but  you  cannot  fool  all  of  the  people 
all  of  the  time." 

"Machine"  politics  is  aided  somewhat  by  the  fact  that 
the  lower  classes,  from  which  the  politician  draws  his 
main  strength,  have  fewer  preferences  among  candidates, 
and  are  more  united  in  feeling  than  the  higher  classes, 
out  of  whose  ranks  the  candidates  come,  and  who  are 
more  apt  to  scatter  their  vote  among  a  number  of  men, 
for  personal  reasons,  sentiment,  financial  interests,  po- 
litical reciprocity,  etc.,  etc.  As  already  indicated,  it 
would,  however,  be  difficult  for  the  politician  to  secure 
the  necessary  co-operation  of  these  lower  classes  without 
disclosing  the  scheme.  Concealed  corruption  would  be 
exceedingly  difficult.  Secrecy  will  out  where  there  are 
many  tongues  to  bind.  It  also  requires  much  money  to 
buy  many  votes.  It  is  true  some  men  may  be  bought  for  a 
"drink,"  but  these  are  dangerous  even  to  the  "machine," 
for  their  tongues  are  loose,  and  they  are  weak  and  faith- 
less. Disclosed  corruption  would  unite  the  general  pub- 
lic as  against  any  other  common  enemy,   and  would 

» See  discussion  under  "  Candidates,"  p.  823. 


300  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

result  in  defeat.  Where  the  open  primary  system  is  in 
vogue  and  a  secret  vote  is  allowed,  the  "machine"  is 
further  disconcerted  because  of  the  impossibility  of  tell- 
ing how  the  voters  who  have  supposedly  been  won  over 
really  vote.  There  is  no  chance  to  fix  responsibility,  or 
to  hold  the  voter  to  the  execution  of  his  false  pledge. 
Every  opportunity  is  presented  at  the  polls  for  the  eva- 
sion of  the  wrongful  dictates  of  politicians,  and  for  the 
casting  of  a  ballot  as  conscience  wills  it. 

Since  votes  alone  count  under  the  direct  primary,  and 
since  every  vote  counts  as  cast,  every  voter  stands  upon 
a  basis  of  equality  with  every  other.     The  "heeler's" 
ballot  counts  no  more  for  evil  than  does  his  opponent's 
for  good.    Under  the  convention  system  this  is  not  true. 
Through  the  power  of  money  and  trickery,  brought  to 
bear  upon  irresponsible  delegates,  the  "machine"  has  a 
decided  advantage  over  unorganized  but  faithful  oppo- 
sition.    The  delegate  whose  duty  ends  with  the  close 
of  the  convention,  and  who  cannot  be  called  to  account 
for  his  action,  is  an  entirely  irresponsible  party.     He 
is  practically  free  to  follow  the  selfish  ambitions  of  his 
own  personal  prejudices  and  preferences,  and  to  yield  to 
the  alluring  temptations  which  "machine"  politicians 
hold  out  to  him.    It  is  incomparably  less  difficult  to  win 
over  one  fickle  delegate  in  a  convention  than  it  is  to 
bribe  the  many  staunch  and  true  constituents  who  are 
represented  by  this  delegate.     The  voter  is  absolutely 
responsible  for  the  way  in  which  he  casts  his  vote,  and 
he  knows  it.     His  conscience  restrains  him.     The  dele- 
gate, on  the  other  hand,  knows  that  he  cannot  be  held 
responsible  for  his  action.     He  has  passed  beyond  the 
power  of  his  constituents.     Even  a  suspicion  of  broken 


The  "  Machine  "  and  the  Corj)07'aiion.        301 

faith  may  te  warded  off  througli  the  possible  conceal- 
ment of  his  corruption,  and  hollow  dissimulation.  He 
feels  more  or  less  free  to  accept  the  advances  of  the  "ma- 
chine" men.  Moreover,  under  the  convention  plan,  "ma- 
chine" influence  is  concentrated  upon  a  comparatively 
small  and  narrow  body  of  men.  It  remains  closeted  and 
largely  hidden  from  the  public  in  convention  lobbies, 
hotel  corridors,  and  back  rooms.  Under  a  system  of 
direct  nomination  such  influence  must  be  directed  upon, 
and  scattered  among,  a  numberless  body  of  voters.  The 
politician  must  come  out  from  his  sumptuous  head- 
quarters and  tempting  lobby  halls.  He  must  intrude 
into  the  very  homes  of  the  people  and  into  the  very  heart 
of  patriotic  American  life.  Can  he  retain  his  power, 
and  effectively  carry  out  his  schemes  under  such  altered 
conditions  ?  Truly,  unless  the  voter  has  lost  faith  in  his 
own  virtue,  and  knows  not  the  wrong  from  the  right,  he 
will  welcome  the  change  gladly,  and  will  demand  an  op- 
portunity for  a  direct  exercise  of  his  choice  in  the  selec- 
tion of  candidates  for  oiSce  in  order  to  prove  his  wisdom 
as  a  citizen  and  his  honor  as  a  man. 

In  every  respect,  the  "machine"  is  seriously  handi- 
capped under  direct  primaries.  It  may  deceive  for  a 
time  and  may  temporarily  dominate,  but  it  cannot  main- 
tain itself  long.  It  cannot  control  without  the  voter's 
permission.  It  is  subservient  to  the  people.  It  is  a  ser- 
vant instead  of  a  master.  The  very  fact  that  political 
combinations  have  everywhere  been  desperately  oppos- 
ing the  advent  of  direct  primaries,  is  in  itself  strong  evi- 
dence of  their  effectiveness  in  destroying  one-man-power 
in  politics. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  COUNTRY  AND  THE  CITY  VOTER  UNDER  DIRECT 

PRIMARIES, 

Considerable  discussion  has  been  carried  on  over  the 
position  of  the  country  and  of  the  city  voter  under  a  di- 
rect primary  law.  The  adverse  contention  is  that  the  in- 
stitution of  direct  primaries  results  in  the  domination  of 
the  country  vote  by  the  city  vote,  and  the  nomination 
and  election  of  men  representing  cities  out  of  all  pro- 
portion to  rural  districts,  thereby  depriving  the  country 
vote  of  its  just  voice  in  government.  This  is,  however, 
largely  an  assumptive  argument.  It  is  based  on  the 
supposition  that  interest  in  government  is  proportion- 
ately weaker  in  the  country  than  in  the  city ;  that  there 
exists  an  extreme  degree  of  hostility  between  the  city 
and  the  country  population  which  leads  to  a  mutual  re- 
pudiation of  candidates  in  which  the  city  has  the  ad- 
vantage because  of  better  organization,  greater  voting 
strength,  more  convenient  voting,  and  a  greater  capacity 
for  effecting  combinations  with  neighboring  cities.  This 
is  strong  theory,  but  weak  practice.  Experience  has  thus 
far  given  little  support  to  the  argument. 

The  farmer  has  according  to  past  records  certainly 
proven  that  his  interest  in  politics  is  commensurate  with 
or  exceeds  that  of  the  city  voter.  The  deplorable  in- 
crease in  the  city  stay-at-home  vote  has  already  been 
dwelt  upon.  In  the  country  no  such  general  fall-off  has 
taken  place,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  "machine"  influ- 


The  Country  and  the  City  Voter.  303 

ences  have  reached  out  from  the  cities,  and  in  many- 
instances  have  completely  stifled  the  voice  of  the  farmer 
in  the  caucus  and  convention.  But  the  man  of  the  plow 
did  come  to  the  polls  in  spite  of  the  fact,  that  the  dele- 
gates of  his  choice  were  repeatedly  defeated  at  the  con- 
ventions by  city  politicians ;  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he 
was  often  thwarted  even  in  the  selection  of  local  candi- 
dates; in  spite  of  the  fact  that  every  year  he  was  called 
to  a  caucus  many  times  to  vote  for  delegates  to  different 
sorts  of  conventions,  although  he  may  have  felt  the  fruit- 
lessness  of  his  efforts  beforehand. 

Under  our  present  system  the  country  often  fares  ill. 
It  is  where  town  politicians  control  the  conventions  that 
the  rural  vote  is  dominated  by  the  city  "machine."  It 
is  much  easier  to  get  city  delegates  "in  line"  than  those 
from  the  country.  Organization  and  preconcerted  plans 
count,  so  that  when  the  delegates  from  town  enter  the 
convention  hall,  they  are  frequently  able  without  much 
difficulty  to  disconcert  and  defeat  a  larger  number  of 
more  or  less  unorganized  delegates  from  the  country. 
An  investigation  was  made  during  the  last  year  in  Hen- 
nepin county,  Minnesota,  which  revealed  the  surprising 
fact  that  during  the  last  fourteen  years  the  city  of  Min- 
neapolis has  without  exception  supplied  every  county 
officer.  During  that  period  the  country  vote  averaged 
about  fifteen  per  cent.,  and  the  chances  for  office  were 
about  one  hundred,  so  that  the  country  districts  were 
campaigned  out  of  some  fifteen  offices  at  every  election.-^ 
In  1860  there  were  fifty-six  farmers  in  the  legislature 
of  Wisconsin.  Since  then  the  number  has  been  contin- 

*  Address  of  J.  A.  Frear  before  Wiscoiisin  Committee  on  Privileges  and  Elections. 


304:  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

"ually  dwindling,  until  in  1901  there  were  but  tliirtj- 
one.  Between  fifty-three  and  sixty  per  cent,  of  the  pop- 
ulation of  this  State  is  rural,  hence  the  country  ought  to 
he  represented  by  over  twice  that  number.  An  allowance 
must,  however,  be  made,  because  the  city  population  has 
been  continually  on  the  increase,  and  for  the  additional 
reason  that  some  legislators  who  really  represent  rural 
communities  are  not  enrolled  so  as  to  indicate  this.  It 
seems  true,  nevertheless,  that  under  our  present  system 
the  country  vote  is  frequently  denied  its  just  representa- 
tion through  political  chicane  and  corruption.  While 
this  fact  has  caused  some  lagging  in  interest  among 
country  voters,  its  effect  has  not  been  as  demoralizing  as 
in  the  city,  and  speaks  eloquently  of  the  farmer's  in- 
terest and  persistence  in  politics. 

As  far  as  convenience  in  voting  is  concerned  the  city 
voter  has  the  advantage.  He  has  only  a  few  steps  along 
a  sidewalk  to  reach  the  polls,  while  the  farmer  must  in 
some  cases  drive  several  miles  over  muddy  roads,  prob- 
ably in  rain  and  storm,  before  he  can  perform  his  duty  of 
citizenship.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  similar 
and  even  worse  conditions  prevail  to-day  if  he  is  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  caucuses  and  conventions — that  there  is 
a  trip  to  be  made  for  each  of  a  number  of  caucuses  every 
year;  and  that  it  may  be  necessary  to  lose  several  hours 
while  attending  each  caucus  meeting;  while  under  a 
direct  primary  system  the  farmer  may  come  when  it 
suits  him  best,  for  the  polls  are  open  all  day.  He  can 
vote,  and  return  to  his  home  knowing  that  when  his 
ballot  is  marked,  every  vote  will  count  one,  and  count 
just  where  he  placed  it.  If,  under  the  present  system  of 
conventions,  the  farmer  is  so  much  alive  to  politics,  how 


The  Country  and  the  City  Voter,  305 

much  more  so  must  he  naturally  be  under  a  system 
which  offers  so  many  direcc  and  immediate  advantages ! 
It  has  already  been  shown  how  large  the  attendance  at 
the  direct  primary  polls  tends  to  be,  and  this  new  en- 
thusiasm is  by  no  means  confined  to  the  cities,  but  stirs 
the  country  as  well.  In  the  rural  districts  of  Hennepin 
county,  Minnesota,  where  the  vote  had  been  lagging  some 
under  the  convention  system,  the  increase  in  the  attend- 
ance at  the  polls  ranged  from  fifteen  per  cent,  to  thirty 
per  cent,  when  the  direct  vote  system  was  given  its  first 
trial  there,  and  in  some  cases  practically  the  entire  vote 
was  cast. 

The  idea  of  combinations  within  or  among  cities  to 
defeat  country  candidates  deserves  to  be  scouted.  It  pre- 
supposes a  degree  of  hostility  between  these  two  interests 
of  which  present  politics,  where  normally  conducted, 
affords  no  good  evidence.  It  pictures  the  city  as  pitted 
against  the  country,  thirsting  with  a  desire  to  dominate 
and  subject.  It  is  only  where  the  politician  represents 
the  "city"  that  such  is  the  case.  When  the  opportunities 
to  nominate  are  equal,  as  they  would  be  under  direct 
vote  at  a  primary  election,  then  the  votes  alone  can  win ; 
then  the  city  will  join  with  the  country  vote,  in  the  com- 
mon cause  of  good  government.  Good  feeling  between, 
the  people  from  town  and  the  people  from  the  country 
would,  it  seems,  even  be  strengthened  in  the  new  enthu- 
siasm for  better  administration. 

In  Minnesota  the  fear  of  rural  domination  by  the 
cities  was  proven  "groundless  and  largely  imaginary," 
and  there  was  no  evidence  of  antagonism.  There  was 
a  large  turn-out  of  voters,  ''and  those  who  took  part  as- 
serted that  for  the  first  time  in  their  lives  they  felt  that 
20 


306  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

tliej  had  actually  taken  part  in  tlie  nomination  of  county 
officers,  and  with  the  same  weight  per  voting  strength 
as  did  the  city.  It  so  happened  that  the  candidate  for 
the  legislature  on  the  Republican  ticket  from  the  coun- 
try was  defeated  for  nomination,  but  strange  to  say,  if 
the  votes  of  the  city  alone  had  been  cast  against  him,  he 
would  have  been  nominated  over  his  opponent  from  the 
city.  The  hostile  country  vote  'killed'  him.  This  man 
afterward  tried  to  have  the  legislature  redistrict  the 
county  so  as  to  have  the  country  a  legislative  district  in 
itself,  but  it  failed  because  the  people  in  the  country 
protested  against  it,  and  wanted  the  district  left  as  it  was 
he  fore  the  primary.  Judging  from  the  experience  taught 
bv  our  first  trial  of  the  law  it  benefits  the  countrv  dis- 
tricts  more  than  the  city,  and  it  is  the  country  people 
who  like  it  best,  the  result  being  that  a  country  member 
has  put  a  bill  into  the  legislature  making  the  law  apply 
to  the  whole  State."  ^ 

While  the  Minnesota  evidence  is  not  conclusive,  but 
only  confirmatory,  it  speaks  well,  for  it  is  entirely  favor- 
able. The  writer  has  not  discovered  a  single  instance 
where  this  objection  was  sustained  by  practical  experi- 
ence with  direct  primaries  in  any  State  which  used  a 
fairly  legalized  system.  There  may  be  such  instances, 
but  they  have  not  yet  shown  themselves.  It  is  the  poli- 
tician, above  all  others,  who  has  raised  the  cry  in  behalf 
of  the  farmer.  With  deceptive  mien  he  poses  as  his 
guardian,  and  points  with  much  feeling  to  a  non-existing 
danger.  While  he  ought  to  be  given  credit  for  some 
sincerity,  it  does  appear  as  though  under  the  mask  of 

'  Minneapolis  Tribune,  Feb.  11,  1901.    Also  correspondence  from  prominent 
Minnesota  reformers.    The  law,  as  we  know,  was  passed. 


The  Country  and  the  City  Voter.  307 

solicitude  for  rural  interests,  he  hopes  to  arouse  preju- 
dice and  opposition  among  the  country  vote  in  order  to 
defeat  the  direct  primary  bills,  and  thereby  maintain 
himself  in  power.  Why  is  not  this  same  solicitude  shown 
at  present  when  the  conventions  meet  ?  There  is  no  rea- 
son to  believe  that  the  farmer  does  not  know  himself,  and 
since  he  fails  to  complain  where  direct  primaries  are 
used,  the  words  of  others  in  his  behalf  sound  hollow  and 
suspicious  of  insincerity,  and  cannot  be  given  serious 
thought  and  credit. 

In  this  connection  the  "representative  vote  system 
of  direct  nomination"  as  successfully  employed  in  J  ack- 
son  county,  Kansas,  for  about  a  score  of  years,  may  be 
suggested,  as  being  preeminently  fair  to  the  country  dis- 
tricts. A  description  of  this  plan  is  found  elsewhere.-^ 
Each  precinct  is  given  a  certain  number  of  nominating 
votes  as  determined  by  the  total  vote  cast  at  the  last 
preceding  election.  It  will  be  seen  that  if  bad  weather, 
or  some  other  adverse  circumstance,  results  in  a  light 
vote  in  country  precincts,  they  would  nevertheless  have 
the  same  voice  in  nominations  as  they  had  in  the  preced- 
ing election.  A  trial  of  the  Kansas  system  might  yield 
highly  satisfactory  results,  and  its  workings  are  recom- 
mended for  serious  consideration. 

I  The  division  of  the  counties  into  nominating  districts, 
each  having  one  instead  of  several  nominating  votes,  has 
also  been  suggested  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  a 
proper  equilibrium  of  country  and  city  interests;  but 
this  scheme  is,  in  the  estimation  of  the  writer,  far  in- 
ferior to  the  one  in  operation  in  Kansas.  In  the  latter, 
the  final  result  is  cumulative  in  character.    ]^o  vote  is 

>  See  p.  184, 


308  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

lost  in  any  precinct,  but  each  goes  toward  making  np  the 
final  count.  In  the  former  plan,  a  successful  minority 
might  in  each  nominating  district  completely  obliterate 
the  effect  of  a  majority  of  all  voters,  composed  of  the 
defeated  minorities.  Proper  apportionment  would  also 
be  more  difficult,  and  tie  results  more  common.  "Ma- 
chine" manipulators  might  achieve  easy  success  in  any 
district  by  concentrating  their  vote,  for  there  would  be 
great  power  in  local  strength.  The  best  all-round  man 
might  easily  be  defeated  by  failing  of  a  nomination  in 
a  sufficient  number  of  districts,  even  though  his  total 
vote  in  all  the  districts  might  exceed  that  of  any  other 
candidate. 

It  is  also  urged  against  direct  primaries  that  ques- 
tions of  nationality  and  geography  cannot  be  given 
proper  consideration  in  the  selection  of  candidates.  If 
we  concede  that  merit,  rather  than  artifice  must  win, 
then  this  is  largely  an  argimient  in  favor  of  a  direct  vote 
system.  If  a  party  deserves  to  win  only  on  the  strength 
of  its  principles,  its  policies,  and  its  candidates,  and  not 
by  shrewd  appeals  to  national,  race,  or  local  prejudices 
and  preferences,  which  are  apt  to  relegate  matters  of 
merit  to  tlie  rear,  then  let  the  direct  primary  come.  If 
these  questions  are  considered  only  en  the  ground  of  ex- 
pediency, of  political  exigency,  and  not  in  behalf  of  the 
interests  and  welfare  of  a  coimty  or  Commonwealth, 
then  it  is  better  that  they  be  not  considered  at  all. 

That  there  might  be  a  bunching  of  candidates  in 
populous  regions  is  but  natural.  In  some  political  divi- 
sions the  city  population  is  in  the  ascendency  by  virtue 
of  numbers,  and  hence  deserves  a  preponderance  in  can- 
didates.   This  is  but  normal  and  fair.    It  must  be  con- 


The  Country  and  the  City  Voter.  309 

ceded,  however,  out  of  fairness  to  tlie  argument,  tliat 
there  may  be  cases  where  it  is  desirable  to  distribute 
candidates  according  to  localities  and  race,  for  pure  mat- 
ters of  administration.  Under  direct  primaries  this 
would  be  largely  impossible,  but  since,  in  any  event,  it 
is  the  best  all-around  man,  the  one  most  generally  de- 
sired, who  alone  can  win  under  direct  primaries,  these 
considerations  would  possess  only  a  minor  importance, 
and  could  not  be  looked  upon  as  presenting  any  serious 
objection  to  the  inauguration  of  a  direct  vote  system  of 
nomination. 


CHAPTEE  VI. 

THE  PUBLIC  PRESS  UNDER  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

It  is  claimed  that  the  direct  primary  will  establish 
the  press  in  power.  This  argument  is  based  npon  the 
fact  that  since  an  advertisement  of  candidates  and  of 
policies  is  necessary  to  success  under  the  system,  the 
newspaper  as  the  best  advertising  medium  will  occupy 
a  position  of  undue  advantage.  It  is  claimed  that  since 
it  operates  upon  strictly  business  principles,  and  is  fully 
aware  of  its  high  function  as  a  channel  through  which 
information  regarding  the  different  candidates  can  best 
reach  the  public,  it  takes  the  selfish  and  unpatriotic 
stand  of  charging  for  its  monopolistic  advertising,  and 
of  adjusting  its  praises  of  men  to  the  size  of  "what  there 
is  m  it. 

Experience  in  some  cases  goes  to  show  that  the  mo- 
ment a  local  campaign  is  fairly  commenced,  the  columns 
of  the  local  press  close  as  tightly  as  a  clam-shell,  and  no 
information  whatever  can  be  obtained  from  that  source 
by  the  public  as  to  any  of  its  candidates.^  This  "closed 
season"  is  inaugurated  in  order  to  coerce  candidates  into 
paid  advertising  if  they  wish  the  public  to  know  any- 
thing of  their  claims  or  fitness  for  public  ofiice.  Candi- 
dates are  thus  induced,  and  in  self-defense  forced,  to 
prepare  and  have  inserted  in  local  papers,  paid  adver- 
tisements containing  florid  eulogies  and  commendations 
of  themselves. 

»  "  Dark  Side  of  Direct  Primaries,"  OuUook,  July  30,  1898. 


Publio  Press   Under  Direct  Primaries.       311 

In  this  way  it  may  happen  that  newspapers  will  come 
forward  and  "recommend"  each  of  a  half-dozen  men, 
as  being  the  fittest  man  for  the  office.  They  may  "dis- 
cover" a  dozen  of  men  as  the  "logical  candidates"  for  a 
single  position,  all  becanse  each  has  paid  for  the  "space" 
on  the  terms  of  "special"  advertising  matter.  Men's 
merits  may  in  this  way  be  spooned  out  to  the  public  on 
the  basis  of  a  well-fixed  scale  of  rates,  and  he  who  tips 
the  beam  highest  with  his  gold  will  shine  brightest  in 
the  columns  of  the  paper.  Such  advertising  would  of 
course  be  valueless  in  enlightening  the  public  as  to  the 
specific  qualifications  of  the  candidates,  and  at  best 
would  but  add  to  the  confusion  of  the  voter.  But  does 
it  seem  as  though  newspapers  would  generally  take  such 
a  position  ?  Is  the  morality  of  the  press  so  low  1  Con- 
sider the  probabilities. 

That  there  will  be  some  such  cases  is  probably  true. 
We  have  them  at  present,  and  very  likely  will  continue  to 
be  burdened  by  them.  We  can  all  point  to  instances 
where  political  combinations  select  candidates,  monopo- 
lize the  press,  and  advertise  their  "available  political 
material."  This  is  especially  true  in  the  cities  where 
the  power  of  the  press  is  greatest,  and  since  direct  pri- 
maries must  inevitably  reduce  the  "machine,"  those  who 
oppose  the  assimiption  of  additional  power  by  the  press 
in  essence  declare,  that  "bosses"  and  professional  poli- 
ticians are  more  to  be  trusted  with  the  welfare  of  the 
people  than  our  newspaper  editors.  This  is  not  sound 
in  face  of  the  average  standard  of  our  press,  and  the 
equity  and  soundness  of  modern  journalism.  It  must 
also  be  remembered  that  a  newspaper  can  only  perma- 
nently influence  the  public  while  its  influence  is  good. 


312  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

When  it  cliooses  a  by-way,  it  will  soon  be  discovered. 
Deceptive  journalism  cannot  long  deceive  to-day. 
Should  a  newspaper  once  establish  the  unsavory  reputa- 
tion of  indiscriminate  or  commercial  advertising  of  can- 
didatures, or  of  unscrupulous  and  unreasonable  attacks 
upon  the  party  in  power,  the  best  way  to  send  a  good 
man  to  an  unearned  political  grave,  would  be  by  getting 
that  paper  to  favor  his  nomination. 

The  argument  against  the  press  can  therefore  not  be 
seriously  considered,  and  while  apparently  well  sup- 
poited  by  experience  in  Cleveland,  Ohio,  it  was  found 
groundless  through  a  wider  and  more  valuable  trial  in 
Minnesota.  Moreover,  the  very  incompleteness  of  the 
Cleveland  direct  vote  system,  when  compared  with  that 
of  Minnesota  with  its  excellent  statutory  setting,  itself 
refutes  the  strength  of  adverse  experienca 

Even  a  better  illustration  of  the  inability  of  unscrup- 
ulous politicians  snccessfuUy  to  gain  their  ends  by  cor- 
ruption of  the  press  is  afforded  in  Wisconsin,  where, 
during  the  last  year,  an  organization  patterned  strik- 
ingly after  the  New  York  Tammany,  has,  by  a  variety  of 
wrongful  methods  obtained  control  of  both  editorial  and 
news  columns  of  a  very  large  number  of  daily  and 
weekly  newspapers  in  all  parts  of  the  State,  to  prosecute 
their  fight  against  the  enactment  of  a  primary  election 
law  and  the  institution  of  a  more  just  system  of  taxa- 
tion. Notwithstanding  the  comprehensive  manner  in 
which  the  work  was  done,  with  thorough  organization  to 
support  it,  both  money  and  labor  appear  to  have  been 
wasted.  The  public  seems  readily  to  have  discovered 
both  the  purpose  and  influences  which  led  to  the  change 
of  newspaper  policy,  promptly  resented  the  attempt  to 


PuIUg  Press   Under  Direct  Primaries.       313 

pervert  public  sentiment,  and  made  the  whole  scheme 
ineffective.  Within  a  brief  period  after  newspapers 
commenced  taking  their  inspiration  from  the  organiza- 
tion which  had  subsidized  them,  they  began  to  be  dis- 
credited bj  their  readers,  even  before  the  opposition  had 
made  complete  exposure  of  the  means  by  which  such 
newspapers  were  controlled. 

If  our  modem  journals  had  nothing  else  to  do  but  to 
mingle  in  partisan  disputes  and  aid  in  the  promulga- 
tion of  party  campaigns,  the  case  would  go  strongly 
against  them.  Theirs  is  a  broader  public  service.  Even 
though  they  are  in  business  for  "what  there  is  in  it," 
they  can  realize  their  aim  only  by  following  a  rational 
and  honest  course.  While  they  may  make  mistakes,  and 
at  times  may  fail  in  proper  business  methods,  if  the  de- 
sired goal  is  to  be  reached,  they  must  in  the  long  run 
hold  to  the  road  of  propriety,  honesty,  and  justness. 
However  great  the  inducements  of  the  moment  may  be, 
their  existence  is  not  to  be  terminated  by  the  day,  the 
week,  or  the  year.  Their  reputation  grows  slowly.  Their 
hold  over  the  public  mind  tightens  with  years  only.  No 
prominent  paper  under  sane  management  would  for  a 
moment  entertain  the  idea  of  compromising  a  future 
and  a  hard-earned  reputation  in  return  for  an  immedi- 
ate paltry  sum  of  money. 

We  may  well  be  calm  in  the  faith  that  honest,  virile 
manhood  will  in  general  continue  to  abide  in  the  ranks 
of  the  press ;  that  if  a  paper  be  partisan,  it  will,  as  a  rule, 
be  fair  and  open ;  that  every  influential,  unpartisan  sheet 
will  continue  to  perform  the  high  service  of  an  unpreju- 
diced, disinterested  disseminator  of  information  in  be- 
half of  a  trusting  public,  as  becomes  a  patriotic  organ 


314  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

of  a  free-born  people;  and  that  deviations  from  snch 
rules  will  be  resented  by  the  readers  of  newspapers  in 
the  most  effective  manner. 

Upon  the  basis  of  the  arguments  thus  far  reviewed  in 
the  preceding  six  chapters  it  is  probably  safe  to  say  that 
under  a  direct  vote  system,  candidates  will  tend  to  he 
more  representative  of  the  people  than  under  the  con- 
vention system.  There  may  be  more  extreme  minority 
nominations ;  corporations  may  dictate  at  the  polls ;  the 
"machine"  may  place  its  man;  the  city  may  dominate 
the  country ;  there  may  be  a  geographical  concentration 
of  candidates;  the  press  may  abuse  its  powers, — these 
are  the  possibilities.  Their  probabilities  have  been 
weighed  in  the  light  of  past  experience,  and  it  seems  as 
though  the  weight  of  evidence  is  distinctly  in  favor  of 
direct  primaries.  ' 


CHAPTER  VII. 

CANDIDATES  UNDER  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

The  question  which  next  presents  itself  is:  Will  the 
public  service  be  more  or  less  open  to  all  citizens  who 
are  otherwise  qualified,  or  does  the  direct  primary  dis- 
criminate in  favor  of  or  against  certain  classes  of  indi- 
viduals ?  Has  the  rich  man  an  advantage  over  the  poor 
man;  the  man  of  leisure  over  the  busy  man;  the  self- 
seeking,  obtrusive  man  over  him  of  a  retiring,  modest 
disposition  ?  We  cannot  legislate  away  the  advantages 
of  wealth,  any  more  than  we  can  legislate  away  the  dif- 
ferences of  men.  The  vantage  ground  of  him  whom 
fortune  has  favored  is  quite  a  natural  one,  and  will  re- 
main in  spite  of  law  and  politics.  All  that  can  be  done 
is  to  give  the  poor  man  an  equal  opportunity  with  his 
wealthy  brother.  That  the  former  is  not  able  to  make 
as  much  of  his  opportunity  as  the  latter  under  any  sys- 
tem of  nomination,  is  obvious.  It  ought  not  to  discredit 
direct  primaries  to  say  that  the  rich  man  might  have 
better  chances  of  nomination  than  the  poor  man.  This 
is  the  case  under  caucuses  and  conventions  and  will 
probably  in  some  measure  continue  to  be  so  forever.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  would  be  a  discredit  if  it  could  be 
shown  that  the  poor  man  is  handicapped  not  only 
thi'ough  a  lack  of  the  natural  power  of  wealth  in  seek- 
ing to  enter  the  public  service  under  direct  primaries, 
but  also  by  some  particular  provisions  which  discrimi- 
nate against  him.    Discriminations  of  this  character  are 


316  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

found  in  primary  systems  which  require  the  payment  of 
a  fee,  graduated  or  fixed;  or  which  make  candidates 
defray  the  expenses  of  the  primary  through  assessments 
which  range  all  the  way  from  five  or  ten  dollars,  gener- 
ally under  direct  primary  laws,  to  two  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars,  or  even  five  hundred  dollars,  under  imperfect 
laws  or  party-regulated  systems.  Such  discriminations 
are  unjust  especially  in  the  latter  case,  while  in  the 
former  they  are  justifiable  only  if  the  good  results  out- 
weigh the  bad.-^ 

But  even  when  laws  require  petitions  instead  of  casH 
payments,  in  order  to  get  the  names  of  candidates  voted 
upon,  objection  is  made  on  the  ground  that  the  rich  man 
is  favored.  Here  we,  however,  approach  that  class  of  ad- 
vantages which  are  naturally  attendant  on  him  who  has 
means,  but  which  the  requirement  of  a  petition  seems  to 
reduce  to  a  mininum.  No  man,  if  he  has  friends,  can 
be  called  too  poor  to  make  the  most  of  a  petition.  No 
man  who  has  no  friends  ought  to  think  of  making  use 
of  one.  Yet  the  moneyed  man  can,  it  is  true,  by  not 
being  obliged  to  economize  in  his  means  of  travel,  get 
around  faster.  He  can  meet  more  people.  He  can  do 
more  in  a  given  time  than  can  his  plainer  brother  of  slim 
finances.  He  can  advertise  in  more  newspapers.  He 
can  publish  bigger  cuts  o^'  himself  and  of  his  attain- 
ments. He  can  circulate  more  catchy  declarations  of 
his  love  for  the  common  people.  He  can  "tip  the  glass" 
with  larger  numbers  of  the  easily  won  lower  classes.  He 
can  donate  plump  sums  for  educational,  charitable,  or 
religious  purposes,  or  rather  for  political  purposes.  He 
can   do  one  hundred  and  one  different  things,  if  he 

>  See  Minority  Nominations,  p.  279,  "fees." 


Candidates  Under  Direct  Primaries.         317 

chooses,  which  will  all  aid  him  to  some  extent  in  secur- 
ing the  nomination  over  the  poorer  man,  who  cannot  do 
these  things.  But  what  of  it  ?  There  is  no  remedy  for 
this  state  of  affairs.  Does  it  not  exist  in  a  most  un- 
mistakable manner  at  the  present  time  under  the  cau- 
cus system?  Has  not  the  wealthy  man  the  same  ad- 
vantages which  he  may  have  under  direct  primaries,  and 
many  more  besides  ?  Does  not  the  mere  possession  of 
wealth  give  a  person  who  cares  to  enter  politics  a  posi- 
tive "stand  in"  with  professional  politicians,  and  open 
the  door  to  office  without  effort  and  without  appeal  to  the 
people  ?  Who  are  the  main  springs  of  the  "machines  ?" 
Who  can  best  pay  the  political  assessments,  the  rich  or 
the  poor  man  ?  Who  buys  the  delegates  and  secures  the 
nomination  ?  It  would  be  interesting  to  know,  if  statis- 
tics could  show  it  faithfully,  what  percentage  of  the  men 
:who  are  in  office  to-day  are  rich. 

Under  the  direct  primary  the  poor  man  has  a  distinct 
advantage  in  that  his  freedom  from  financial  connections 
removes  any  possible  suspicion  of  his  having  money  in. 
poKtics,  and  recommends  him  to  the  "plain  people."  He 
is  more  of  their  kind.  There  exists  a  greater  community 
of  interest,  a  mutual  bond  of  sympathy,  and  if  he  has 
capacity  his  chances  with  this  class  ought  to  be  exceed- 
ingly good.  The  rich  man  must  work  himself  into  the 
confidence  of  a  lower  class,  and  this  may  be  difficult. 
Money  is  likely  to  be  looked  upon  with  suspicion  by  the 
poorer  classes.  Its  use  is  distrusted.  Positive  worth  and 
strength  of  character  are  necessary  to  recommend  the 
monej'ed  candidate  to  the  conservative  plain  man.  If 
the  rich  man  has  greater  merit,  the  probabilities  are  that 
he  will  win,  and  the  office  will  be  his  legitimate  "spoils.". 


318  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

If  he  lias  not  merit,  then  the  poor  man's  poverty  and 
merit  will  generally  be  worth  more  in  the  estimation  of 
the  people  than  the  rich  man's  money,  and  the  poor  man 
>vill  win. 

In  Cleveland,  Ohio,  many  opponents  of  direct  pri- 
maries are  inclined  to  support  the  rich  man  theory,  by 
claiming  that  the  popular  vote  plan,  as  practically  ad- 
ministered there,  affords  an  opportunity  for  the  ad- 
vantageous use  of  money.  This  adverse  criticism  loses 
much  of  its  force  when  we  recall  that  the  Cleveland  sys- 
tem is ^ very  limited  in  scope;  is  largely  extra-legal; 
operates  in  the  midst  of  unusually  turbulent  factional 
politics ;  admits  of  f rauduent  voting  because  of  the  ab- 
sence of  a  registration  or  enrollment  svstem;  and  con- 
tains  numerous  other  imperfections  which,  if  remedied, 
there  is  every  reason  to  believe,  would  reverse  the  un- 
favorable experiences  which  are  claimed  to  have  been 
encountered  there. 

In  Minnesota,  after  the  first  trial  in  Hennepin 
county,  no  objection  was  raised  on  the  score  of  unfair 
discrimination  against  the  poor  man,  except  as  far  as 
the  required  ten  dollar  fee  was  concerned.  In  other 
States  the  numerous  complications  and  imperfections  of 
the  systems  in  operation  more  or  less  cloud  any  possible 
conclusions,  but  nothing  was  discovered  which  could  be 
construed  as  seriously  arguing  that  the  man  of  little 
means  is  not  better  taken  care  of  under  a  direct  vote 
scheme  of  nomination  than  under  our  present  conven- 
tion system. 

How  is  it  with  the  man  of  leisure,  and  the  busy  man  ? 
The  circulation  of  a  petition  requires  much  time.  The 
business  man  cannot  afford  to  spend  his  hours  in  such 


Candidates  Under  Direct  Primaries.  319 

an  undertaking.  The  remnneration  of  an  office,  grant- 
ing that  success  would  be  his,  may  be  infinitesimal  when 
compared  with  the  income  of  his  business.  The  pay- 
ment of  a  fee  would  be  more  convenient  to  him,  but  it 
has  already  been  seen  that  this  involves  a  questionable 
policy.  To  the  man  of  leisure  a  petition  would  be  no 
great  obstacle.  Its  circulation  might  be  a  pastime. 
When  the  hours  hang  hea-\^  it  might  be  a  diversion.  If 
he  has  political  ambitions,  and  feels  confident  of  his 
popularity,  there  is  nothing  to  hinder  him  from  filing 
his  petition,  and  trying  for  an  office. 

But  how  is  it  at  present  ?  Is  not  much  time  con- 
sumed in  running  for  a  nomination  ?  It  is  necessary  to 
come  out  before  the  public ;  to  prosecute  a  vigorous  cam- 
paign; to  canvass  for  votes;  to  advertise  both  directly 
and  indirectly  through  friends;  probably  to  "work  up 
a  stand  in"  with  the  politicians ;  to  attend  conventions ; 
and  to  court  the  favor  of  delegates.  All  this  takes  much 
time.  Does  not  Bryce  lament  the  fact  that  our  capable 
men  of  affairs  are  kept  out  of  office,  and  out  of  conven- 
tions as  delegates,  because  of  the  time  it  takes  to  get 
there  ?  This  is  not  only  an  unavoidable  circumstance  of 
our  political  system,  but  of  life  itself.  It  takes  time  to 
do  things,  and  it  is  for  us  to  decide  to  what  particular 
thing  we  prefer  to  dedicate  our  time.  When  the  decis- 
ion lies  between  public  service  and  business,  on  terms  of 
remuneration,  it  readily  passes  to  the  latter.  It  is- 
choice  that  keeps  the  busy  man  out  of  office  now.  The 
sacrifice  is  worth  more  to  him  than  the  god,  so  he  does 
not  sacrifice. 

It  may  be  suggested  that  since  under  a  direct  pri- 
mary it  is  not  necessary  to  effect  compromises  with  poli- 


320  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

ticians;  to  get  "pullecl"  into  office  by  politicians;  and  to 
spend  nmcli  time  in  a  dishonorable  and  disreputable 
manner  in  attempting  a  nomination,  there  will  be  a  new 
incentive  to  the  busy  man  of  integrity  to  try  for  an  of- 
fice. If  he  thinks  he  possesses  the  popularity  necessary 
to  success  an  honorable  road  is  clear  to  him. 

It  is  further  argued  that  a  direct  primary  law  will 
''breed  pestiferous  demagogues,  and  retire  the  modest, 
unassuming  man ;  "  that  the  lover  of  notoriety  is  placed 
in  his  proper  elements  thereby;  that  the  man  who  has 
time  to  scour  the  country,  who  loves  to  fling  his  name 
broadcast  in  the  streets,  and  to  see  it  flaring  red  through- 
out the  wide  universe,  is  the  one  who  wins  out,  while  the 
capable,  intelligent,  busy  man  with  justifiable  natural 
pride,  and  with  praiseworthy  modesty  and  sensitiveness 
of  feeling,  is  not  heard  from,  and  remains  withdrawn 
from  the  public  eye.  In  other  words,  this  means  that  the 
real  merits  of  the  candidates  are  not  sufficiently  adver- 
tised to  enable  the  people  to  decide  intelligently,  or  that 
the  people  have  not  the  ability  to  do  so.  The  latter  arguea 
democracy  a  failure ;  the  former,  the  direct  vote  system. 
The  one  remains  unproven,  the  other  unconfirmed. 

That  the  public  might  be  deceived  by  false  advertise- 
ments of  candidates  is  possible.  Where  a  candidate 
runs  for  an  office  embracing  ^  wide  area,  only  a  compara- 
tively few  of  the  voters  are  personally  acquainted  with 
the  men  seeking  office,  and  can  render  independent  de- 
cisions. All  others  must  rely  upon  reputation,  reports, 
hearsay  evidence,  newspaper  talk,  etc.,  etc.,  and  these 
may  furnish  an  uncertain  basis  for  an  intelligent  judg- 
ment    On  the  other  hand,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that 


Candidates  Under  Direct  Primaries.         321 

political  contest  is  certain  to  disclose  tte  weakness  of  a 
candidate.  If  he  has  any  faults  or  frailties  of  char- 
acter his  opponent  is  quite  sure  to  discover  them  to  the 
public.  Yet  incapable  or  corrupt  men  may  succeed  in 
stealing  a  march  upon  the  people  once,  but  their  career 
will  end  with  the  next  election.  The  people  are  too 
many  and  too  alert  to  be  fooled  very  often.  Nor  will 
there  be  many  chances  for  deceit.  Men  who  have  proven 
their  worth  will  be  retained  or  chosen  to  more  respon- 
sible positions.  There  will  be  no  "machine"  to  consult; 
no  "political  interest"  to  be  considered ;  no  new  men  to 
be  placed  by  politicians  on  grounds  of  personal  expe- 
diency. Hence,  good  men  in  office  are  likely  to  be  re- 
elected to  office  if  they  maintain  a  clear  record  and  sat- 
isfy the  public.  A  direct  vote  system  makes  a  good 
record  of  a  man  worth  something  to  him.  "It  places  a 
premium  on  statesmen."  The  tendency,  therefore,  will 
probably  be  towards  longer  terms  of  service,  fewer  elec- 
tions of  new  and  untried  men,  and  rarer  opportunities  for 
political  mongers  and  scalawags  to  betray  a  trusting  pub- 
lic. That  the  great  masses  of  common  people,  who  would 
determine  results  under  direct  primaries,  should  scruti- 
nize most  closely  the  merits  of  the  men  who  ask  for 
office,  is  but  natural,  for  it  is  they  who  are  most  vitally 
interested  in  good  government.  It  is  an  important  trust, 
which  they  confide  to  the  public  officer,  and  confidence 
and  faith  in  his  power  and  ability  very  naturally  pre- 
cede its  bestowal. 

The  direct  primary  has  shown  that  the  bad  officer 
who  hitherto  had  been  kept  in  the  public  service  only 

through  the  influence  of  politicians,  has  no  chance  of 
21 


322  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

nomination  at  the  hands  of  the  people.  Every^^here 
direct  nominations  seem  to  have  resulted  in  the  defeat 
of  corrupt  office-holders.  In  Minnesota,  where  the  Re- 
publican Association  had  control  of  the  nominations  of 
Hennepin  county  previous  to  the  adoption  of  the  direct 
primary,  all  its  candidates  were  defeated,  and  the  club 
has  gone  out  of  existence.  Among  the  defeated  were  four 
notorious  aldermen,  all  of  whom  were  replaced  by  strong 
and  honest  men.  That  the  men  placed  in  nomination 
were  the  choice  of  the  masses  of  the  party,  was  shown 
by  the  fact  that  out  of  all  the  candidates  chosen,  not  a 
single  one  belonging  to  the  dominant  party  was  defeated 
at  the  election.  Heretofore  this  had  not  always  been  the 
case.  The  men  selected  by  the  city  or  county  conven- 
tion had  frequently  been  repudiated  at  the  polls.  Illus- 
trations of  a  similar  nature  are  found  in  the  history  of 
the  direct  vote  systems  operated  in  Kentucky,  Peimsyl- 
vania,  Kansas,  Missouri,  Indiana,  Tennessee,  and  else- 
where. 

That  direct  nominations  have  given  general  satisfac- 
tion in  the  selection  of  better  men  seems  further  proven 
by  the  fact  that  not  a  single  instance  was  discovered 
in  the  course  of  the  collection  of  the  material  for  this 
treatise,  where  the  system,  after  having  been  given  a 
reasonably  fair  test,  was  abandoned.  The  ground  seems 
to  have  been  held  where  once  it  was  won.  Since  we  do 
not  keep  the  bad  and  reject  the  good,  the  fact  that  direct 
primaries,  which  are  instituted  with  the  distinct  purpose 
of  overcoming  the  evils  of  "machine"  politics,  have  not 
only  held  tlieir  own,  but  are  being  extended  to  wider 
areas,  argues  in  sup]X)rt  of  the  statement  which  may  be 


Candidates  Under'  Direct  Primaries.         323 

made  in  conclusion  of  the  preceding  discussion,  that 
where  candidates  are  nominated  by  a  direct  vote  of  the 
people,  thej  tend  to  be  more  representative  of  the  people, 
and  more  competent  to  perform  the  duties  of  public  ser- 
vants under  a  democratic  government,  than  when  they 
are  chosen  through  the  narrow  medium  of  a  perverted 
convention  system. 


CHAPTEK  VIII. 

MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT  UNDER  DIRECT  PRI- 
MARIES. 

Strange  to  say,  that,  while  the  avowed  purpose  of 
direct  primaries  is  to  improve  our  government,  and  to 
purify  municipal  politics,  the  cry  is  raised  that  the  re- 
sult would  be  to  increase  corruption  and  to  still  further 
inject  party  politics  into  our  cities.  This  contention 
can  in  no  wise  be  reconciled  with  the  fact  that  at  the 
national  conference  held  at  New  York  in  1898,  for  the 
improvement  of  our  primaries,  all  the  great  city  govern- 
ment leagues  of  the  country,  and  many  of  our  most  able 
municipal  thinkers,  were  represented,  and  enthusiast- 
ically urged  the  reform. 

The  great  bane  of  city  government  to-day  is  corrupt 
'party  politics.  The  loudest  cry  of  the  municipal  re- 
former is:  "Get  party  politics  out  of  our  cities."  The 
situation  is  this:  in  our  cities  party  organizations  are 
generally  controlled  by  political  combinations  which  se- 
cure the  nomination  of  candidates  for  city  offices,  irre- 
spective of  capacity  and  honesty,  solely  for  personal  and 
political  reasons.  When  the  election  comes,  those  voters 
who  are  disgusted  with  the  candidates  selected  by  the 
politicians  or  feel  their  helplessness  in  mending  matters, 
stay  away  from  the  polls  entirely,  or  try  to  organize  an 
independent  movement.  With  those  who  attend  and  vote, 
the  question  of  party  is  likely  to  determine  the  ballot 
cast,  either  because  of  meaningless  party  enthusiasm,  ig- 
norance, habit,  indifference,  or  bribe,  so  that  the  Demo- 


MuniGi^pal  Government  Under  Direct  Primaries.    325 

cratic  voter  who  goes  to  the  polls  casts  his  ballot  for  the 
Democratic  candidates  selected  by  the  "machine,"  just 
because  they  are  Democrats  and  not  Republicans,  while 
the  Republican  voter  adheres  to  his  ticket  in  the  same 
way.  It  is  the  ticket  that  is  being  voted  in  such  cases, 
and  not  the  men.  Thus  it  happens  that  unscrupulous 
men,  the  instruments  of  the  party  politicians,  are  placed 
in  responsible  municipal  positions,  and  demoralize  our 
.  city  governments  until  they  reek  with  corruption. 

The  municipal  reformer  hopes  to  remedy  this  con- 
dition of  affairs  by  "getting  party  politics  out  of  the 
cities," — by  inducing  the  voter  to  cast  his  ballot  outside 
of  party  lines  on  a  pure  basis  of  merit.  The  principle  is, 
that  since  the  corrupt  party  organizations  within  the 
city  no  longer  furnish  the  voters  with  good  men ;  since 
the  individual  is  left  powerless  to  vote  for  good  men 
when  he  acts  within  party  lines,  he  must  be  shown  the 
necessity  of  going  outside  of  the  party,  of  casting  aside 
his  feelings  of  partisanship  and  voting  for  the  most 
capable  men.  The  reform  of  party  organization,  the 
defeat  of  the  party  "machine,"  from  within  the  party 
is  given  up  as  a  hopeless  undertaking.  The  partisan 
is  asked  to  forsake  the  power  which  denies  him  his  own 
and  to  assert  his  right  independently.  In  other  words, 
non-partisanship  and  independence  is  the  doctrine  of 
municipal  reform. 

Is  our  municipal  party  organization  beyond  reform  ? 
If  purified,  could  our  city  governments  be  properly  con- 
ducted by  officers  chosen  through  the  use  of  our  regular 
party  machinery  ?  Is  it  advisable  to  get  party  politics, 
even  when  purified,  out  of  city  elections  ?  The  answers 
to  these  questions  may  probably  be  put  in  the  negative. 


326  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

We  will  recall  modem  instances  where,  in  tlie  ahsence 
of  any  appreciable  amount  of  '^macliine"  politics,  mu- 
nicipal administration  is  being  conducted  upon  an  em- 
inently satisfactory  plan  through  existing  party  organ- 
ization ;  while  in  the  past,  in  the  early  days  of  city  gov- 
ernment, when  politics  was  more  generally  pure,  the 
various  party  organizations  likewise  furnished  the  city 
with  successful  officers.  Where  politics  is  pure  there 
is  no  clear  reason  why  a  good  man  should  not  be  even 
more  willing  to  come  forward  within  party  lines  than 
without.  Organization  of  some  kind  is  necessary  to 
success.  If  he  runs  outside  of  party  lines  as  an  "inde- 
pendent," or  "non-partisan,"  he  cannot  win  without 
concerted  action;  this  is  an  absolutely  necessary  condi- 
tion of  victory.  If  he  comes  under  the  party  standard, 
he  merely  makes  use  of  a  pre-existing  and  convenient 
organization,  and  thereby  does  not  involve  the  questions 
of  free  trade,  tariff,  and  trusts,  which  moul.d  the  parties 
on  wider  lines.  I^or  does  the  voter  who  casts  his  ballot 
for  such  a  candidate  necessarily  let  free  silver  enter 
into  his  decisions.  Where  the  masses  of  the  party  con- 
trol the  organization  the  good  man  can  just  as  easily 
be  nominated  within  the  party  lines  as  without,  and 
there  will  be  no  necessity  for  a  reorganization  upon  an 
"independent"  basis. 

It  would  seem,  then,  that  where  the  "machine"  can  bo 
gotten  out  of  party  politics,  it  will  not  be  necessary  to 
get  part.y  politics  out  of  the  city,  because  the  only  service 
— and  it  is  a  most  valuable  one — which  the  party  sup- 
plies in  such  cases,  is  that  it  furnishes  a  good  organiza- 
tion, a  purely  artificial  instrumentality  through  which 
the  voters  of  the  city  may  conveniently  act  in  the  selec- 


Municipal  Government  Under  Direct  Primaries.     327 

tion  of  their  public  servants.  If  the  "machine"  cannot 
be  gotten  out  of  party  politics,  then  party  politics  must 
be  gotten  out  of  the  cities.  And  in  order  to  get  it  out  of 
the  cities  the  voter  must  be  educated  in  non-partisanship 
in  municipal  affairs  by  being  taugbt  to  vote  for  the  best 
man,  irrespective  of  party  prejudices  and  preferences. 

But  the  aim  of  the  direct  primary  is  to  get  the  "ma- 
chine" out  of  politics,  and  the  way  it  has  succeeded  in 
Minnesota,  California,  Kentucky,  Indiana,  Missouri, 
and  elsewhere,  speaks  well  for  further  success.  It  gives 
every  dissatisfied  voter  a  chance  to  vote  directly  for  the 
man  he  thinks  ought  to  be  put  in  office,  and  thereby  dis- 
comfits the  "machine"  and  puts  it  "off  duty."  Objec- 
tion is  however  made  that  even  though,  the  "machine" 
is  ousted,  these  very  direct  primaries  inject  national  and 
state  politics  into  the  city,  when  it  ought  to  be  gotten 
out.  It  is  claimed  that  the  voter  is  forced  to  vote  a 
straight  ticket  without  any  chance  of  helping  into  office 
the  good  man  on  another  ticket ;  that  he  is  forced  to  vote 
along  party  lines,  even  though  he  might  wish  to  do 
otherwise.  Assume  that  the  voter  were  to  be  confined 
to  his  own  ticket,  would  he  not  be  very  likely  to  get  all 
of  the  good  men  he  wanted  on  that  ticket  ?  Experience 
has,  up  to  the  present,  generally  sho^vn  his  range  of 
choice  under  direct  primaries  to  be  a  very  good  one. 

But  more  than  this,  a  properly  framed  law  will  not 
deny  a  voter  the  right  of  helping  to  office  any  good  men 
running  on  other  tickets,  and  at  the  same  time  will 
guard  against  the  fraudulent  nomination  of  weak  men. 
A  provision  such  as  was  incorporated  in  the  Stevens  bill 
of  Wisconsin  of  1901,  as  returned  from  the  committee 
rooms,  enables  the  Eepublican  voter  to  write  upon  his 


328  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

own  party  ballot,  the  name  of  any  good  man  on  some 
other  ticket,  and  to  have  it  count  as  a  nominating  vote 
upon  the  Republican  ticket.  In  this  way  a  good  Demo- 
crat may  be  nominated  or  "endorsed"  upon  the  Repub- 
lican ticket. 

Moreover,  a  provision  for  an  independent  or  non-parti- 
san ticket,  such  as  was  contained  in  this  same  Stevens 
bill,  enables  every  voter  to  vote  for  any  man  he  chooses, 
and  permits  the  independent  nomination  of  any  good 
men  who  may,  or  may  not,  be  voted  for  upon  some  other 
ticket.  Thus  perfect  freedom  of  movement  is  obtained 
both  within  and  outside  of  party  lines.  No  voter  is 
compelled  to  vote  for  but  those  men  who  appear  upon  his 
own  ballot,  but  is  free  to  vote  for  any  man  he  chooses, 
irrespective  of  his  party.  There  is,  under  this  plan,  no 
injection  of  national  or  state  politics  into  the  city  nomi- 
nations. 

This  criticism  applies  with  some  force  to  our  present 
caucus  system.  Only  one  caucus  may  be  attended  under 
the  present  law  in  Wisconsin,  so  that  the  voter  can  aid 
in  the  nomination  of  only  one  ticket.  "Machine"  influ- 
ence may  prevent  even  a  free  expression  of  his  choice. 
He  has  no  opportunity  of  "helping  in"  a  good  Democrat 
if  he  has  chosen  to  attend  a  Republican  caucus,  while 
the  "slate"  offered  by  the  politicians  at  the  Republican 
caucus  may  prove  highly  dissatisfactory. 

A  direct  primary  would  serve  in  better  stead.  There 
would  be  a  much  larger  vote  polled.  The  many  voters 
among  the  better  classes  of  all  parties  who  form  the 
majority  of  the  stay-at-home  vote  at  the  present  time, 
would  again  take  active  part,  as  has  been  repeatedly 
shown  by  experience.     There  would  be  no  necessity  of 


Jlunicipal  Government  Under  Direct  Primaries.    329 

getting  party  politics  out  of  the  cities,  because  party 
organization  would  be  found  useful,  and  the  individual 
voter  would  probably  discover  that  he  could  exercise  his 
power  most  effectively  within  party  lines.  A  new  en- 
thusiasm and  interest  in  municipal  affairs  would  be 
awakened  among  the  people,  through  the  restored  power 
of  independence  and  effective  action,  and  would  result 
in  the  nomination  of  more  satisfactory  men.  The  pos- 
sibility of  reward  at  the  polls  for  efficient  service,  would 
no  longer  be  thwarted  by  politicians,  and  would  call  forth 
the  best  efforts  of  the  city's  servants.  A  new  freedom 
would  come  to  the  voter  in  the  form  of  an  unhampered 
choice,  based  not  upon  politics,  but  upon  men.  With 
these  changes,  our  city  governments  would  undoubtedly 
become  purer;  the  wail  of  municipal  corruption  would 
be  hushed ;  and  prosperity  would  be  further  stimulated. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

WHO  SHALL  VOTE  AT  THE  PRIMARY? 

One  of  the  most  important  and  most  difficult  prob- 
lems tliat  primary  reformers  have  had  to  contend  with^ 
and  which  still  remains  largely  unsolved,  is  the  ques- 
tion of  determining  who  shall  vote  at  the  primary  elec- 
tions. It  is  important,  because  the  successful  operation 
of  a  primary  law  is  impossible  without  the  proper  deter- 
mination of  who  shall  participate  in  the  functions  of 
the  primary  election.  It  is  difficult,  because  it  raises 
puzzling  queries  which  experience  must  determine. 
Shall  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation  be  required,  or 
shall  the  voter  be  given  perfect  freedom  to  vote  for  any 
or  all  candidates  of  any  party,  protected  by  tlie  independ- 
ent security  of  a  secret  Australian  ballot  ?  If  a  test  is  im- 
posed requiring  the  disclosure  of  his  party  membership, 
shall  it  be  prescribed  by  the  legislature,  or  by  the  polit- 
ical party  ?  Shall  it  be  based  upon  present  affiliation, 
and  inteaation  to  vote  the  ticket  of  the  party  at  the  next 
general  election,  or  shall  it  require  a  disclosure  of  the 
party  for  which  he  cast  the  majority  of  his  votes  at  the 
last  election,  without  a  declaration  to  continue  his  sup- 
port of  the  same  party  ?  What  provision  can  be  made 
for  the  voter  who  has  changed  his  party  affiliations,  or 
who  has  come  of  age  since  the  last  general  election,  and 
hence  has  not  yet  legally  demonstrated  his  membership 
with  any  party  ?  If  a  declaration  of  party  affiliation  is 
required,  how  far  may  it  proceed  without  violating  the 
secrecy  of  tlie  ballot  guaranteed  by  the  Australian  ballot 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary f  331 

laws,  and  without  disfrancliising  certain  classes  of  voters 
to  whom  the  right  of  suffrage  is  extended  by  law,  thus 
exposing  the  entire  law  to  the  attacks  of  the  courts,  and 
rendering  it  liable  to  a  decision  of  unconstitutionality  ? 
These  are  some  of  the  perplexing  difficulties  which  con- 
front the  primary  reformer.  In  their  solution,  he  must 
fall  back  upon  experience,  as  fast  as  the  tests  are  made, 
and  upon  his  own  personal  estimate  of  the  requirements 
of  the  particular  political  situation  in  his  own  State. 

Our  general  elections  do  not  present  the  same  diffi- 
culties in  the  determination  of  who  shall  vote.  An  ex- 
planation of  this  fact  strikes  straight  for  the  heart  of  the 
present  problem,  and  sets  forth  the  fundamental  ideas 
which  determine  it.  A  general  election,  as  the  term  im- 
plies, is  distinctly  an  affair  of  the  people,  while  a  pri- 
mary election  is  solely  an  affair  of  a  party  of  the  people. 
The  political  business  transacted  at  a  general  election  is 
the  selection  of  the  servants  of  the  State,  or  of  all  the 
people ;  while  that  performed  at  the  primary,  is  the  selec- 
tion of  party  candidates,  of  party  delegates  to  choose  such 
candidates,  and  of  party  committee  men.  The  contest  at 
a  general  election  is  between  different  parties,  each  striv- 
ing for  the  control  of  the  government,  while  the  conflict 
at  a  primary  election  is  within  the  party,  each  of  differ- 
ent elements  striving  for  party  leadership,  and  for  party 
representation  in  the  final  struggle  at  the  general  elec- 
tion. 

As  a  necessary  consequence  of  this  difference  in  the 
nature  of  general  and  primary  elective  functions,  there 
exists  also  a  difference  in  their  results.  At  a  general 
election,  there  is  determined  the  question  of  what  par- 
ticular party  government  we  shall  have,  while  at  a  pri- 


S32  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

niary  election  there  is  determined  the  question  of  what 
particular  members  of  the  party,  as  representing  its  pol- 
icies, shall  be  offered  to  conduct  that  government.  At  a 
general  election  each  party  comes  forward  with  its  favor- 
ite policies  and  principles,  and  upon  their  merits  courts 
the  public  favor,  and  asks  for  the  support  of  its  candi- 
dates. Each  hopes  for  victory.  Each  is  in  honor  bound 
to  adhere  to  the  declarations  of  its  platform,  and  if  suc- 
cessful is  unremittedly  pledged,  through  the  firmly  fixed 
principle  of  party  responsibility  and  party  administra- 
tion, to  carry  out  its  declarations  and  promises  as  faith- 
fully as  good  will  and  power  permit.  The  defeated 
minority  has  a  right  to  be  governed,  just  as  the  successful 
majority^  is  pledged  to  govern,  in  accordance  with  those 
policies  and  principles  by  virtue  of  which  success  was 
achieved. 

Now  this  firm  duty  which  falls  in  its  fullest  responsi- 
bility upon  the  party,  is  by  the  party  confided  as  a 
sacred  trust  to  those  men  whom  it  has  seen  fit  to  honor 
with  candidatures  looking  to  office.  It  follows  as  a  log- 
ical sequence,  that  since  it  is  at  the  primary  election 
that  the  party  must  decide  upon  whom  it  is  willing  to 
bestow  the  trust  of  office,  it  has  a  right  to  ask  for  free  and 
independent  action,  unhampered  by  interference  from 
other  parties,  so  that  it  may  nominate  men  who  will  be 
its  loyal  representatives,  chosen  by  vote  of  its  own  mem- 
bers, and  by  none  else. 

In  considering  the  question,  therefore,  of  who  shall 
vote  at  the  primary,  two  leading  ideas  must  be  kept 
constantly  in  mind:  first,  party  organization  must  be 
kept  intact  and  free  from  invasion  by  opposing  forces ; 

I  In  case  of  plurality  elections  it  is  the  reverse. 


Who  S?iaU  Vote  at  the  Primary?  333 

and  second,  the  fullest  freedom  must  be  given  to  all 
parties  in  the  gathering  and  the  marshalling  of  their 
forces  for  contest,  upon  as  perfect  a  basis  of  equality  as 
law  can  provide.  The  latter  is  essential  in  order  that 
the  best  results  of  party  government  may  be  attained 
through  a  thorough  and  searching  campaign  engaged  in 
by  all  parties  of  sufficient  strength  to  be  dignified  with  a 
recognition  under  the  Australian  ballot  laws,  from  the 
time  of  its  inauguration  in  the  form  of  a  nominating 
campaign,  to  its  conclusion  at  the  general  election. 

Though  opinions  may  harmonize  with  reference  to 
these  two  general  principles  of  party  action  at  the  pri- 
mary, the  methods  by  which  it  is  hoped  to  establish  and 
maintain  them  in  successful  operation  by  no  means 
agi'ee.  An  inspection  of  the  primary  laws  now  upon  the 
statute  books  in  the  different  States  of  the  Union  reveals 
the  fact  that  widely  different  means  have  been  resorted 
to  for  the  protection  of  the  party  at  the  primary,  ranging 
all  the  way  from  the  "closed"  or  "party  primary"  sys- 
tem, requiring  a  sworn  declaration  of  party  affiliation, 
and  the  balloting  of  a  separate  party  ticket,  to  the  "open 
primary"  system,  where  only  the  general  election  quali- 
fications are  required,  and  the  voter  is  left  free  to  vote 
the  ticket  of  any  party,  in  the  belief  that  loyalty  to  his 
party  will  hold  him  to  his  duty,  while  the  secret  security 
of  his  action  will  insure  proper  independence  in  his 
vote. 

It  will  be  of  interest  to  see  which  one  of  these  two 
systems  is  the  favorite  one  as  demonstrated  by  the  direct 
primary  laws,  or  by  the  party  rules  which  are  in  force 
in  the  States  that  were  studied  in  this  connection.  Out 
of  thirty  States  using  the  closed  primary  system,  fifteen 


334  Arguinent  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

.leave  tbe  prescription  of  the  test  for  participation  in 
the  primary  election  to  the  party  authorities.^  In  eight 
States  the  entire  test  is  prescribed  by  the  legislature  ;2 
while  in  six  States  the  legislature  prescribes  only  part 
of  the  test,  by  requiring  general  election  qualifications 
for  voting  and  permitting  tlie  party  committee  to  impose 
additional  requirements.^  In  every  case  where  the 
power  to  impose  a  test  is  vested  with  the  party,  such  a 
test  appears  to  have  been  required. 

A  good  illustration  of  the  open  primary  system,  as 
inatituted  through  caucus  laws,  is  found  in  Wisconsin 
and  in  Oregon.  In  both  of  these  States  the  voter  is  free 
to  attend  the  caucus  of  any  one  party,  a  penalty  being 
imposed  for  fraudulent  participation  in  the  caucuses  of 
several  parties.  The  open  primary  was  also  used  in 
Minnesota  in  1899,  under  the  famous  Hennepin  county 
direct  vote  system.  Under  the  Minnesota  law  the  voter 
was  permitted  to  vote  the  ticket  of  any  one  party,  or  if 
several  tickets  were  marked,  only  that  one  which  con- 
tained the  largest  number  of  marks  was  counted.  Open 
primary  systems,  very  similar  to  the  one  of  Minnesota, 
.were  incorporated  in  the  California  law  of  1899,  and  in 
the  Oregon  law  of  1901,  both  of  which  were  declared 
unconstitutional  partly  because  of  their  failure  to  pro- 
vide for  proper  party  tests."* 

Since  about  a  dozen  primary  election  bills  were  de- 
feated, for  one  reason  or  another,  in  the  different  States 

'  Alabama,  Florida,  Georgia,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Louisiana,  Mis-issippi,  Maryland, 
Nebraska  (Lincoln),  Nevada,  Pennsylvania,  South  Carolina,  South  Dakota, 
Texas,  and  West  Virginia. 

»  California,  Illinois,  Indiana,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Missouri,  New  York,  Ore- 
gon. 

»  Arkansas,  Kentucky,  Nebraska,  Utah,  Washington. 

*  For  a  discussion  of  the  constitutional  aspects  of  a  test,  see  p.  370. 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary  f  335 

during  the  last  year,  it  will  be  of  interest  to  see  what 
the  present  tendency  is  with  reference  to  this  question 
of  a  test,  and  what  proportion  of  the  two  classes  provid- 
ing for  oj^en  or  for  closed  primaries  were  successful. 
Out  of  twelve  bills  studied  with  this  in  view,  three  pro- 
vided for  the  open  primary  system.  These  were  intro- 
duced into  the  legislatures  of  Wisconsin,^  Illinois,  and 
Maryland;  while  the  bills  introduced  into  the  legisla- 
tures of  Michigan,  ISTew  York,  North  Dakota,  Indiana, 
Califomia,  Minnesota,  Oregon,  and  ISTew  Hampshire, 
had  incorporated  in  them  the  system  of  closed  primaries. 
All  of  the  open  primary  bills  were  defeated,  while  five 
providing  for  closed  primaries, — those  of  Indiana,  Mich- 
igan, California,  Minnesota,  and  Oregon — ^were  passed. 
How  far  the  defeat  of  the  former  was  due  to  their  open 
primary  feature  could  not  be  definitely  ascertained.  But 
in  most  cases,  it  seems  to  have  been  so  unimportant  a 
factor  in  determining  the  fate  of  the  bill  as  to  be  prac- 
tically ignorable. 

The  decided  preponderance  of  evidence,  both  past  and 
present,  in  favor  of  closed  primaries,  seems  to  present 
a  strong  argument  in  their  favor.  However,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  old  country  squire  of  Addison's  days,  "there 
is  much  to  be  said  on  both  sides."  It  is  argued  in  favor 
of  the  party  primary  that  it  alone  tends  to  preserve  the 
integrity  of  the  party,  and  enables  it  to  choose  its  own 
candidates, — men  in  whom  it  may  have  implicit  faith 
and  confidence,  which,  as  has  already  been  indicated,  is 
the  essence  of  the  ballot  at  the  primary.     A  test  oath, 

»  The  Wisconsin  bill  as  introduced  provided  for  closed  primaries,  but  was  re- 
turned from  the  committee  rooms  with  the  open  primary  substituted.  The 
reverse  was  true  of  the  successful  Minnesota  bilL 


336  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

such,  for  example,  as  tlie  requirement  of  a  declaration 
of  present  intention  to  support  the  nominees  of  the  party 
at  the  next  general  election,  would  tend  to  exclude  two 
general  classes  of  voters  from  fraudulent  participation 
in  the  primaries  of  other  parties :  first,  members  of  those 
parties  which  are  recognized  by  law  as  qualified  to  act 
at  primary,  or  general  elections,  as  parties;  and  second, 
all  independents,  or  "floating  voters,"  and  members  of 
parties  lacking  sufficient  strength  to  be  dignified  with  a 
place  upon  the  primary  election  ballots. 

In  case  of  the  first  class,  there  are  some  restraining 
influences  which  tend  to  hold  the  voters  to  their  own 
tickets,  whether  a  test  is  required  or  not,  which  in  case 
of  the  second  class,  are  entirely  absent,  because  its  mem- 
bers have  no  tickets  of  their  own  to  vote.  The  motives 
which  actuate  the  first  class  in  taking  part  in  the  pri- 
maries of  other  parties,  are  by  no  means  commendable, 
while  those  of  the  second  class  may  be  defended  with 
some  justice,  resulting  as  they  do  from  an  exclusion  from 
civic  rights,  which  is  an  unavoidable  injustice  inherent 
in  the  method  and  practice  of  democratic  government. 

Under  the  open  primary  system  those  members  of  the 
first  class  whose  party  loyalty  is  not  sufficiently  firm, 
or  whose  affiliations  have  been  temporarily  weakened 
or  broken  by  a  bribe,  threa^  offer,  reward,  promise,  or 
intrigue,  are  enabled  to  vote  for  the  weak  candidates  of 
that  party  which  is  their  most  dangerous  rival,  and  may 
thereby  reduce  its  chances  of  electing  its  men  at  the 
general  election.  To  their  aid  there  would  come  mem- 
bers of  the  second  class — independents,  and  members  of 
parties  not  granted  the  right  of  tickets  of  their  owq. 
The  restraining  influences  of  this  class  are  weaker  than 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary  f  337 

they  are  in  case  of  tlie  first  class.  There  is  less  con- 
sciousness of  forsaken  party  principles,  of  broken  faith, 
of  fraud  and  deception.  It  would  be  easier  to  persuade 
them  to  join  in  the  conspiracy  of  nominatiug  the  weaker 
man,  if  perchance  they  have  not  already  decided  to  vote 
for  him  for  one  reason  or  another.  The  political 
schemers  may  hence  look  for  some  support,  if  not  for  the 
major  support  in  their  plot,  from  members  of  this  second 
class  of  voters  who  are  excluded  under  closed  primaries. 

So  much,  then,  for  the  sources  of  the  fraudulent  votes. 
requisite  in  the  nomination  of  weak  candidates  in  the 
ranks  of  opposite  parties.  What  are  the  absolutely  essen- 
tial conditions  to  make  even  an  attempt  possible?  Therer 
must  be  no  contest  in  the  ranks  of  the  scheming  party 
for  that  particular  office  for  which  at  least  two  unequally 
popular  members  of  the  rival  party  are  running.  The 
difference  in  popularity  between  the  two  or  more  can- 
didates must  be  within  reasonable  bounds,  so  that  the 
lead  of  the  strongest  may  be  overcome.  Such  a  combina- 
tion of  circumstances  is  purely  the  creature  of  chance, 
and  in  any  very  important  offices  its  occurrence  would 
necessarily  be  rare. 

In  order  that  such  an  attempt,  where  possible ,  may 

be  successful,  it  is  necessary  that  some  one  possessed  of 

reliable   knowledge   of   political    conditions   determine 

who  is  the  weaker  candidate.     This  is  an  undertaking 

which  in  many  cases  is  difficult   and  surrounded  by 

more  or  less  uncertainty,  yet  it  is  absolutely  necessary 

in  order  that  the  attempt  may  be  at  all  effective.    !N'ext, 

it  is  necessary  to  find  enough  voters  within  and  outside 

the  ranks  of  the  party  to  defeat  a  strong  candidate. 

Here  then  we  must  add  to  the  uncertainty  of  who  is  the 
23 


338  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

stronger  candidate,  and  how  mucli  stronger  he  is,  the 
uncertainty  of  being  able  to  overcome  his  lead. 

Since  "wherever  the  open  primary  system  is  in  vogue, 
no  splitting  of  tickets  is  allowed,  or  only  that  ticket  is 
counted  which  contains  the  largest  number  of  marks,* 
and  this  in  effect  is  the  former,  it  is  necessary  to  find  a 
sufficient  number  of  voters  with  consciences  that  lend 
themselves  to  bribery  and  fraud,  who  are  willing  to 
waive  all  rights  to  help  nominate  their  own  ticket ;  who 
are  ready  to  forsake  each  and  all  of  their  personal 
friends  who  may  run  on  that  ticket,  for  the  sake  of  help- 
ing in  this  doubtful  attempt  of  nominating  perhaps  a 
single  candidate  on  the  rival  party's  ticket. 

In  addition  to  the  uncertainties  already  mentioned, 
there  is  another  of  even  greater  importance,  as  to 
whether  or  not  the  voters  who  have  been  won  over  to 
the  plot,  and  who  have  once  broken  faith  with  their 
party  and  their  friends,  will  not  do  so  a  second  time, 
and  abandon  their  wrongful  leaders  when  the  supreme 
moment  at  the  polls  comes.  Since  the  ballot  is  free  and 
secret,  under  the  open  primary  system,  the  remorseful 
and  penitent  voter  is  perfectly  secure  in  voting  as  his 
conscience  dictates,  and  not  as  his  itching  palm  would 
have  it. 

This  powerful  obstacV  in  the  way  of  fraudulent 
machinations  is  further  strengthened  by  the  fact  that 
such  a  conspiracy  must  necessarily  be  kept  secret,  or  the 
party  will  render  itself  subject  to  counter  attacks  and 
draw  upon  itsolf  the  public  opprobrium  for  fraudulent 
intriguing  to  secure  control  of  some  department  of  gov- 
ernment, not  upon  the  merits  of  its  principles,  but 
through  political  chicanery  and  corruption. 

'  Minnesota  Law  of  1808;  Oregon  Law  of  1901. 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary?  339 

In  answer  to  this  argument,  therefore,  that  under  an 
open  primary  system  an  opportunity  is  afforded  for  one 
party  to  nominate  a  weak  candidate  in  the  opposing 
party's  ranks,  it  may  be  said  that  such  an  opportunity 
can  rarely  come;  the  attempt  will  rarely  be  made;  and 
success  is  even  more  rarely  probable.  Much  more  fre- 
quently may  we  expect  such  results  to  be  accomplished, 
where, — as  under  the  caucus  and  convention  system, — 
political  manipulators  of  different  parties  are  enabled  to 
play  into  each  other's  hands  by  setting  up  weak  candi- 
dates, and  then  dividing  the  ill-gotten  spoils  between 
them. 

There  now  remains  to  be  considered,  in  working  to- 
wards a  conclusion  as  to  the  expediency  of  an  open  pri- 
mary system,  that  portion  of  the  independents,  and  mem- 
bers of  parties  not  granted  the  right  of  tickets  of  their 
own,  who  compose  that  part  of  the  second  class  which 
is  not  open  to  corruption,  or  which  has  escaped  the  poli- 
tician,— men  whose  political  morality  is  more  or  less 
stamped  by  honesty  and  sincerity.  May  they  justly, 
and  properly,  be  excluded  from  the  primaries  of  other 
parties  under  a  closed  primary  system,  or  shall  they  be 
allowed  to  participate  in,  and  temporarily  affiliate  them- 
selves with,  some  stronger  party  of  their  choice?  The 
answer  depends  upon  whether  we  taie  a  narrow  and 
more  or  less  prejudiced,  partisan  view,  or  whether  our 
position  is  determined  by  liberality  and  tolerance  based 
upon  a  broader  and  deeper  idea  of  justice. 

From  the  partisan  standpoint  it  may  be  argued,  that 
since  the  proper  essence  of  the  primary  is  the  choice  of 
men  who  are  loyal  to  the  party,  and  who  are  trusted  by 
the  party  to  stand  by  tne  pledges  of  declared  policies 


84:0  Arguinent  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

and  principles,  only  permanent  members  onglit  to  he 
allowed  to  participate,  or  at  least  only  tliose  who  gen- 
erally affiliate  with  the  party.  By  admitting  votes  o£ 
another  political  faith,  uncertainties  are  introduced  into 
the  results  of  the  primary,  and  men  may  be  chosen  whom 
the  masses  of  the  party  are  not  prepared  to  endorse. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  urged  f  roin  a  more  liberal 
point  of  view,  that  the  members  of  those  political  parties 
which  are  too  small  to  be  recognized  upon  the  ballot,  as. 
well  as  the  ''independents,"  ought  to  be  allowed  to  throw 
in  their  lot  with  one  party  or  other  at  the  primary,  be- 
cause, since  at  the  following  general  election  t\\ej  also 
can  have  no  ticket  of  their  own,  thev  are  free  to  vote  as 
they  choose,  and  would  in  all  probability  vote  the  same 
ticket  as  at  the  primary.  They  therefore  would  occupy 
the  position  of  a  party  which  is  temporarily  (for  that 
nomination  and  election)  leagued  with  and  part  of  some 
stronger  party.  Their  temporary  affiliation,  being  free 
in  choice,  would  be  honest  and  sincere.  They  are  for 
that  elective  campaign,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  an 
integral  part  of  the  stronger  party,  and  would  therefore 
seem  to  have  as  much  a  right  to  participate  in  the  pri- 
mary as  any  of  the  generally  affiliated  members. 

Objection  may  be  made,  that  the  ticket  of  a  different 
party  might  be  voted  at  the  general  election,  because 
of  dissatisfaction  with  the  men  nominated  at  the  pri- 
mary. Undoubtedly  some  members  of  this  second  class 
would  swerve  around  to  another  party,  but  this  is  no 
valid  reason  for  their  exclusion,  because  it  always  hap- 
pens that  similar  "apostasy"  is  practiced  by  regular 
members  of  the  party.  Men  of  all  parties  are  human, 
with  whom  similar  causes  will  produce  largely  similar- 
effects. 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary?  341 

It  might  further  be  urged  in  favor  of  closed  primaries 
that  the  imposition  of  a  test  would  not  affect  all  mem- 
bers of  the  class  under  discussion ;  that  there  are  those 
among  the  weaker  parties  to  whom  the  law  does  not 
grant  separate  tickets,  who  would  exclude  themselves 
under  any  system;  who  would  remain  staunch  in  their 
principles,  and  would  prefer  to  sacrifice  their  franchise, 
rather  than  forsake  their  party.  This  is  true,  but  it  is 
merely  a  plea  in  mitigation  of  the  argument  against 
closed  primaries,  without  in  any  way  discrediting  the 
open  primary.  On  broad  and  generous  principles, 
therefore,  the  open  primary  is  preferable  to  the  closed 
primary,  as  far  as  its  effect  on  this  particular  class  of 
voters — independents  and  members  of  weaker  parties — 
is  concerned. 

Another  burden  must  be  placed  at  the  door  of  the 
closed  primary  in  that  it  is  an  instrument  of  power  in 
the  hands  of  the  "machine"  which  can  hold  the  voter  to 
his  corrupt  pledge  of  support,  because  it  knows  how  he 
votes.  Thus  the  freedom  and  independence  of  the  bal- 
lot, which  is  so  much  to  be  desired,  is  destroyed  in  many 
cases  through  the  introduction  of  responsibility  to  a 
political  combination,  under  which  voting  may  be  made 
extremely  disagreeable,  and  the  right  to  challenge,  in 
the  hands  of  "machine"  workers,  much  abused. 

The  argument  against  closed  primaries  that  "no  self- 
respecting  man  will  bind  himself  to  barter  away  his 
right  to  exercise  a  free  choice  at  the  polls  for  the  sake 
of  a  vote  at  the  primary,"  is  without  weight,  for  the 
possibility  of  framing  an  effective  test  which  makes  it 
unnecessary  to  "barter  away  a  right"  has  already  been 
demonstrated.  Of  a  similar  nature  is  the  contention  that 


342  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

the  requirement  of  a  test  is  imdemocratic,  unrepubli- 
can,  and  un-American,  in  that  it  gives  this  or  that 
group  of  men  (the  legislators  or  the  party  authorities) 
the  right  to  say  how  a  larger  group  of  men  shall  vote. 
This  is  a  mere  babbling,  sentimental  fabrication,  and 
belongs  to  that  class  of  indefensible  theories  which  main- 
tain that  the  enactment  of  effective  primary  legislation 
is  an  unwarranted  and  unconstitutional  infringement 
of  the  freedom  of  political  parties  and  of  the  liberties  of 
their  members. 

With  justice  it  may,  however,  finally  be  said  that  the 
necessity  of  revealing  the  party  of  one's  faith  tends  to 
exclude  those  voters  who  for  some  one  or  another  valid 
reason  cannot  afford  to  disclose  their  party  affiliations. 
This  class  is  unquestionably  very  small  indeed,  but 
against  it  the  closed  primary  works  an  injustice  which 
would  be  removed  by  an  open  primary  system. 

A  question  may  also  fairly  be  raised  as  to  whether  or 
no  an  oath  really  accomplishes  its  pui'pose  and  possesses 
the  restraining  power  which  it  is  presumed  to  have.  It 
is  a  highly  lamented  fact,  recognized  among  the  men  of 
the  legal  profession,  that  the  oath  is  losing  much  of  tlie 
sacredness  and  power  which  it  once  had  and  wliich  it 
ought  to  possess.  Through  extended  application  it  is 
acquiring  a  perfunctory  cnaracter  whicli  loosens  the 
solemn  bonds  which  once  gave  it  a  mighty  and  sacred 
significance.  False  enrollments  have  been  of  common  oc- 
currence. In  Kentucky,  for  example,  in  1894  the  Dem- 
ocratic nominees  were  defeated,  "although  if  the  decla- 
rations of  the  registered  voters  had  been  made  good, 
the  Democrats  would  have  had  a  majority  of  11,000."  ^ 

•  Report  of  National  Conference  on  Primary  Election  Reform,  New  York, 
1898. 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary?  343 

Upon  tha  basis  of  the  preceding  discussion  the  writer 
is  prepared  to  cast  his  vote  in  favor  of  the  open  primary 
system,  as  possessing  the  capacity  of  giving  the  most 
general  satisfaction.  There  may  be  political  conditions 
under  which  it  would  be  a  complete  failure,  but  such 
cases  would  have  to  be  solved  by  experimentation.  What 
position  political  parties  will  take  upon  tlie  question  of 
a  test  will  depend  largely  upon  their  relation  to  the  in- 
dependent voter  and  to  the  members  of  imrecognized 
parties. 

The  merits  of  the  open  primary  have  been  set  on  trial 
in  but  few  instances,  the  best  test  having  been  made 
under  the  Hennepin  county  law  of  Minnesota  in  1900. 
It  seeoms  to  have  worked  so  well  that  when  a  new  bill  was 
drawn  during  the  last  year  provision  was  again  made 
for  the  incorporation  of  the  open  primary.  But  before 
its  passage  the  closed  primary  was  substituted  for  rea- 
sons which  its  friends  claimed  were  largely  far-fetched, 
and  displayed  considerable  ignorance  on  part  of  the  op- 
ponents as  to  the  practical  operation  of  the  open  pri- 
mary even  in  their  own  States. 

If  the  political  conditions  or  public  sentiment  in  a 
State  is  such  as  to  demand  closed  primaries  based  upon 
a  test,  another  important  question  arises  as  to  whether 
the  legislature  or  the  party  ought  to  prescribe  such  a 
test.  The  answer  will  depend  upon  whether  we  follow 
out  a  theoretical  or  a  practical  course  of  reasoning.  In 
accordance  with  the  former  we  may  argue  in  favor  of  the 
party  test.  The  necessity  of  political  parties  is  unques- 
tioned. They  exist  as  mediums  through  which  the  prin- 
ciple of  party  government  is  put  in  operation  by  making 
that  party  which  is  victorious  responsible  for  government 


344:  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

which  is  in  harmony  with  its  declared  policies  and  prin- 
ciples. For  this  reason  the  parties  must  be  their  own 
masters.  They  must  be  free  to  hold  primaries  in  which 
none  but  their  own  members  may  act.  They  must  choose 
their  own  officers.  This  can  only  be  accomplished  by 
vesting  in  each  party  the  power  of  excluding  unde- 
sirable elements,  of  determining  party  membership,  of 
prescribing  its  own  test.  It  is  the  test  that  determines 
the  party.  Vest  in  the  legislature  the  right  to  impose  a 
test,  and  you  imply  the  presumption  of  a  right  to  impose 
any  test,  however  unreasonable  or  unjust  it  may  be.^ 
You  give  a  Democratic  legislature  the  power  to  destroy 
opposition  to  its  continued  rule  by  permitting  it  to  leg- 
islate away  the  Republican  party  through  unreasonable 
tests  and  vice  versa.  Not  only  could  one  party  be  placed 
in  the  hands  of  its  enemy,  but  the  dominant  party 
could  maintain  itself  in  power  by  destroying  effective 
opposition. 

Mora>ver  it  might  also  be  argued  that  where  the 
power  of  prescribing  the  test  rests  with  the  legislature 
the  test  could  not  be  changed  more  frequently  than  bi- 
ennially, or  in  some  cases  annually,  and  it  might  happen 
that  a  party  would  be  left  powerless  to  exclude  from  par- 
ticipation factions  created  through  a  division  on  great 
public  questions,  which  still  retain  the  old  party  name, 
and  who  might  through  their  nominally  legal,  but  vir- 
tually fraudulent  participation,  expose  the  party  to  the 
danger  of  a  nomination  of  weak  candidates.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  prescription  of  a  test  were  vested  in  the 
party,  its  requirements  might  be  changed  at  any  time  as 
the  party  saw  fit,  and  undesirable  factions  might  be  ex- 

'  Spier  V.  Baker.  120  Cal.  370. 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primai^?  345 

•eluded  "where  political  conditions  demanded  it.  For 
these  reasons  it  would  seem  that  the  party  is  the  proper 
authority  to  prescribe  a  test.  Indeed  a  member  of  tlie 
supreme  court  of  California  put  it  even  more  strongly 
when  he  said:  "No  one  would  contend  that  the  legisla- 
ture can  prescribe  what  the  test  shall  be."  ^ 

It  is  clear  that  the  preceding  ai'gument  is  as  pre- 
eminently theoretical  as  it  is  impracticable.  It  fur- 
nishes a  superb  illustration  of  an  instance  where  legal 
reasoning  takes  advantage  of  a  practical  argument.  The 
suggestion  of  the  California  court  that  a  Democratic 
legislature  might  impose  a  free  silver  test  is  imdoubtedly 
true  as  far  as  the  possibility  is  concerned,  but  is  quite 
inconceivable  in  practice.  It  reduces  the  political  mor- 
ality of  the  legislator  to  tlie  low  plane  of  that  of  a  nar- 
row, selfish,  unscrupulous  partisan,  ready  to  sacrifice  the 
liberties  of  his  fellow  countrymen  upon  the  altar  of  per- 
sonal ambition  and  party  fanaticism.  All  that  the  argu- 
ment shows  is  the  extreme  possibility  which  logically 
might  result,  but  in  the  eagerness  to  carry  the  thread 
-of  legal  reasoning  to  the  utmost,  the  element  of  proba- 
l)ility,  which  is  always  involved  in  a  practical  argument, 
is  entirely  lost  sight  of. 

Moreover,  we  must  remember  that  in  every  State 
there  exists  a  written  Constitution  containing  a  body  of 
liberties,  and  behind  that  Constitution  there  stands  on 
guard  a  conservative  and  watchful  judiciary,  mindful  of 
the  people's  interest,  whose  staying  powers  would  in 
times  of  indiscretion  and  light-headed  action,  where  nec- 
essary, check  a  radical  legislature. 

Respecting  the  advantages  of  the  political  party  in  the 

>  Britton  v.  Board,  61  Pac.  Rep.  1115.    Dissenting  opinion  of  Temple,  J. 


34:6  Ar^g anient  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

prompt  institution  of  necessary  changes  in  the  form  of 
a  test,  we  may  say  that  a  test  can  be  so  worded  as  to 
apply  effectively  to  any  new  parties  that  might  be  organ- 
ized, without  in  any  way  jeopardizing  the  integrity  of 
the  old  parties,  so  that  frequent  changes  would  be  unnec- 
essary. No  difficulties  of  this  kind  have  as  yet  been  en- 
countered where  tests  have  been  in  use. 

Finally,  it  is  also  apparent  that  the  argument  of  the 
California  judge  rests  upon  theoretical,  rather  than 
upon  practical  justice  and  law,  from  the  fact  that  it  is 
based  upon  several  assumptions  which  actual  conditions 
disprove.  It  assumes,  in  the  first  place,  that  while  the 
legislature  might  not  be  guided  by  reason  and  justice, 
the  party  would  be,  because  it  acts  directly  in  its  own 
interests.  In  the  second  place,  it  assumes  that  party  or- 
ganization, party  activity,  and  party  rules  would  always 
be  detei-mined  by  what  best  promotes  the  interests  of  the 
whole  party,  and  not  by  what  is  to  tlie  advantage  of  the 
few ;  that  where  the  power  of  prescribing  a  test  is  placed 
in  the  hands  of  the  party,  it  rests  with  an  authority 
which  is  the  faithful  representative  and  mouthpiece  of 
all  its  members,  so  that  the  consensus  of  opinion  of  the 
individual  party  members  as  to  what  constitutes  a 
proper  test  would  rule.  Undoubtedly  such  well  ordered 
and  efficient  party  organizations  may  be  found  in  some 
places,  but  it  is  generally  true  that  wherever  the  most 
pressing  need  exists  for  the  correction  of  political  evils 
the  party  organization  is  controlled  by  "combinations," 
"rings,"  or  "bosses,"  whose  will  is  master,  and  which 
would  abuse  any  power  that  might  fall  into  their  hands. 
In  such  cases  the  delegation  of  the  vital  function  of  de- 
claring the  test  of  party  membership,  apparently  to  the 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primarij?  347 

party,  but  really  to  the  "powers  that  be,"  would  clinch 
upon  the  helpless  masses  a  continuation  of  the  curse  of 
bossism.  The  result  would  be  as  disastrous  to  the  peo- 
ple as  was  the  application  of  the  principle  of  rule  regula- 
tion by  the  parties  themselves  to  the  primaries^  in  conse- 
quence of  the  success  of  the  Australian  ballot  system, 
and  -under  wliich  tJie  primaries  in  our  cities  fell  into 
their  present  state  of  disrepute.^ 

The  fact  that  in  so  many  of  the  States  enumerated  on 
a  preceding  page  the  parties  prescribe  the  test,  is  no  argu- 
ment in  favor  of  such  an  arrangement,  because  a  study 
of  the  primary  election  laws  now  in  operation  in  those 
States  will  show  that  where  the  laws  are  more  or  less 
comprehensive  and  complete,  the  test  is  invariably  pre- 
scribed by  the  legislature;  while  where  they  are  rudi- 
mentary, or  merely  legalize  direct  primaries,  the  pre- 
scription of  a  test  is,  together  with  all  other  rules,  left  to 
the  party  as  a  matter  of  fact,  because  the  idea  of  state 
regulation  of  parties  in  their  activities  at  the  primaries 
has  not  yet  taken  sufficient  root  to  suggest  such  a  step  as 
a  statutory  test. 

We  must  conclude,  then,  that  the  prescription  of  a 
test  for  the  determination  of  who  shall  vote  at  the  con- 
current primary  elections  of  the  different  political  par- 
ties, may  best  be  confided  to  that  body  which  has  already 
been  entrusted  with  the  incomparably  higher  function 
of  making  all  the  laws  of  the  people — the  legislature. 

This  would  be  no  infringement  upon  the  just  liber- 
ties of  political  parties,  because  "they  are  no  longer  pri- 
vate concerns  organized  for  agitation,  but  they  are  pub- 
lic institutions  organized  to  name  the  officers  of  govern- 

'  See  page  39  an  party -regulated  primaries. 


318  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

ment  and  so  to  control  the  government  itself.  The  indi- 
vidual citizen  has  practically  no  voice  in  government  ex- 
cept through  these  party  organizations.  Consequently, 
the  State  which  protects  his  rights  of  citizenship  must 
protect  his  rights  of  partisanship.  If  this  protection  is 
left  to  a  private  syndicate,  the  test  will  be  his  past  devo- 
tion to  the  syndicate.  If  it  is  put  in  the  hands  of  the 
State,  the  test  will  be  his  present  intention  to  support  the 
party  of  his  choice.  This  declaration  of  intention  rather 
than  previous  affiliation,  is  the  t^st  of  citizenship,  when- 
ever needed,  as  in  naturalization,  and  should  also  be  the 
test  of  partisanship  whenever  needed.  The  only  safe- 
guard of  such  a  test  is  the  sovereign  power  of  law.''  ^ 

What  shall  the  form  of  such  a  test  be  ?  Shall  it  lay 
stress  upon  past  affiliation  with  a  party,  or  upon  a  pres- 
ent intention  to  support  its  nominees?  Shall  it  be 
worded  in  general  terms,  or  shall  absolute  and  unquali- 
fied allegiance  to  the  party  be  required  ?  As  Professor 
Commons  well  says,  when  the  prescription  of  a  test  is 
left  with  the  party,  emphasis  will  be  placed  upon  past 
devotion  to  that  party.  If  it  is  left  to  the  State,  the  prin- 
<3iple  applied  in  the  case  of  naturalization  is  adhered  to, 
and  a  declaration  of  intention  to  support  in  the  future, 
i.  e.  at  the  next  general  election,  is  demanded.  The 
former  is  too  narrow  and  too  partisan.  The  latter  is  the 
more  logical,  and  more  generally  advocated,  and  makes 
room  for  the  voter  who  has  come  of  age ;  for  the  natural- 
ized voter;  and  for  him  who  has  changed  his  party 
affiliations. 

It  may  be  well  in  this  connection  to  study  briefly  the 

I  Prof.  John  R.  Commons,  Syracuse  University,  in  address  before  National 
Primary  Election  Ooufereuce,  New  York,  Jan.  20,  21,  1898. 


Who  Shall   Vote  at  the  Primary?  349 

tests  embodied  in  the  important  primary  election  laws 
passed  during  the  last  year.     The  Indiana  law  of  1901 
entitles  only  those  persons  to  vote  who  at  the  last  elec- 
tion voted  for  the  regularly  nominated  candidates  of 
the  party.    In  case  of  a  challenge  the  voter  must  make 
affidavit  to  the  effect  that  he  is  a  qualified  legal  voter  of 
the  precinct ;  that  at  the  last  preceding  election  he  affili- 
ated with  the  party  holding  the  primary  election ;  that  he 
voted  for  the  regular  nominees  of  the  party ;  and  that  he 
intends  to  support  and  vote  for  the  regular  nominees  at 
the  coming  election ;  provided,  however,  that  any  quali- 
fied voter  who  has  come  of  age' may  vote,  if  he  declares 
his  intention  of  supporting  the  party's  candidates  at  the 
next  election.    This  test,  it  seems,  might  be  declared  un- 
constitutional upon  the  ground  that  it  excludes  the  fol- 
lowing qualified  persons  from  voting  at  the  primary: 

(1)  Those  who  have  changed  their  party  affiliations; 

(2)  those  who  were  naturalized  since  the  last  election; 

(3)  those  who  were  qualified  to  vote,  but  for  one  reason 
or  another,  failed  to  do  so. 

Under  the  Michigan  direct  primary  law  of  1901  a 
very  simple  test  is  required.  The  voter  merely  states 
with  what  party  he  is  affiliated,  and  then  receives  the 
proper  ballot. 

The  Oregon  law  of  1901,  applying  to  the  election  of 
delegates  to  conventions  in  cities  of  10,000  inhabitants 
and  over,  requires  the  voter  either  to  declare  that  it  is 
his  intention  to  support  a  majority  of  the  party's  can- 
didates at  the  next  election ;  or  that  he  voted  for  a  ma- 
jority of  its  candidates  at  the  last  election. 

The  test  found  in  the  California  law  of  1901  regulat- 
ing the  selection  of  delegates  at  the  primaries,  requires 


350  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

a  hona  fide  present  intention  to  support  the  candidates  of 
the  party.  The  Oregon  test  is  superior  to  that  of  Cali- 
fornia, because  of  its  general  wording.  It  is  inferior, 
in  that  it  permits  a  Democrat  who  has  turned  Republi- 
can since  the  last  election,  to  vote  the  Democratic  ticket 
nevertheless,  just  because  he  had  supported  the  Demo- 
cratic candidates  at  the  preceding  election. 

Under  the  Minnesota  law  of  1001,  the  voter  "re- 
ceives a  ballot  of  the  political  party  with  which  he  de- 
clares (under  oath,  if  his  right  thereto  is  challenged) 
tliat  he  affiliated,  and  whose  candidates  he  generally 
supported  at  the  last  general  election,  and  with  which 
party  he  proposes  to  affiliate  at  the  next  election;  pro- 
vided, that  a  first  voter  shall  not  be  required  to  declare 
his  past  political  affiliations."  This  test  excludes  the 
following  classes  of  qualified  electors  from  participating 
in  the  primary  election:  All  voters  who  changed  their 
party  affiliations  since  the  last  election;  and  all  those 
who  for  one  reason  or  another  failed  to  vote  at  the  last 
election,  although  qualified  to  do  so.  These  two  classes 
of  voters  are  disfranchised  because  they  are  neither  first 
voters,  nor  generally  supported  the  party  at  the  last 
election.  Two  other  classes  of  voters — those  who  were 
naturalized  since  the  last  election,  and  those  who  came 
of  age,  who  are,  in  somj  States,  disfranchised  under 
falsely  worded  tests,  are,  however,  provided  for  under 
the  Minnesota  law. 

Probably  the  best  form  of  a  test  is  the  one  incorpor- 
ated in  the  excellent  enrollment  system  of  New  York, 
which  requires  a  declaration  of  general  sympathy  with 
the  principles  of  the  party,  and  the  intention  to  sup- 
port generally  the  nominees  of  the  party.     This  test 


Who  Shall  Vote  at  the  Primary?  351 

meets  the  objection  which  may  be  made  against  one 
which  requires  a  declaration  of  intention  to  support  all 
of  the  party  candidates  at  the  next  election,  to  the  effect, 
that  it  tends  to  exclude  those  who  are  reedy  to  support 
the  ticket  generally,  but  not  every  single  candidate,  and 
that  it  may  prevent  proper  independent  action  at  the 
elections,  by  those  who  took  the  oath. 

It  may  be  said,  then,  in  conclusion  of  this  chapter, 
that  the  open  primary  system  of  voting,  under  which  no 
declaration  of  party  affiliation  is  required,  appears 
worthy  of  general  preference  to  the  closed  or  party  pri- 
mary system;  that  where,  for  one  reason  or  another, 
closed  primaries  are  desired,  the  test  may  well  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  legislature,  and  in  form  require  a  declara- 
tion of  intention  generally  to  affiliate  with  the  party  at 
the  nexi;  election.^ 

»  For  other  arguments  in  favor  of  such  a  test  and  for  its  constitutional  aspects, 
see  p.  370. 


CHAPTEE  X. 

THE  CONSTITUTIONALITY  OF  PRIMARY  ELECTION 

LAWS. 

While  the  question  of  the  constitutionality  of  primary 
election  laws  has  been  raised  in  a  large  number  of 
States,  and  some  laws  have  been  declared  unconstitu- 
tional because  of  their  incorporation  of  provisions  ob- 
noxious to  State  Constitutions,  no  court  has  ever  denied 
the  right  to  the  State  to  control  by  appropriate  legislation 
the  nomination  of  candidates  for  office.  Foremost 
among  the  States  in  which  important  constitutional 
questions  were  raised,  stand  Colorado,  Pennsylvania, 
N^ew  York,  California,  and  Oregon.  In  the  case  of 
Colorado  and  Pennsylvania  the  decisions  turned  upon 
the  broad  principle  of  whether  or  no  a  legislature  might 
recognize  j)olitical  parties,  as  such,  in  law,  and  then  pro- 
ceed to  regulate  their  activity  in  making  nominations; 
while  the  California  decisions,  of  which  there  were 
three,  and  the  decisions  of  the  circuit  court  and  the  su- 
preme court  of  Oregon,  conceded  this  legislative  power, 
and  carried  the  legal  idep  a  step  further,  by  declaring 
primary  elections  subject  to  the  Constitution.  This  was 
accomplished  through  the  interpretation  of  primary 
election  laws  as  being  election  laws  in  the  same  sense 
as  general  election  laws,  and  hence  subject  to  all  consti- 
tutional provisions  respecting  "elections  authorized  by 
law." 

In  1881  the  charge    of    unconstitutionality  was  ad- 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.    353 

vanced  against  a  Pennsylvania  law^  prohibiting  bribery 
and  fraud  at  nominating  conventions  and  primary  elec- 
tions, upon  the  ground  that  such  legislation  encroached 
upon  the  liberties  of  political  parties  and  restricted 
their  freedom  of  nomination.  The  court,  however,  over- 
ruled this  plea,  and  declared  conventions  and  primaries 
fit  subjects  for  legislation,^ 

A  similar  question  was  raised  in  Colorado  in  1886, 
when  a  bill  for  the  prevention  of  frauds  in  the  nomina- 
tion of  officers  was  introduced  in  the  legislature.^  The 
Senate,  by  resolution,  requested  the  supreme  court  to 
answer  the  following  questions:  ''Is  it  constitutional 
to  enact  any  law  attempting  to  regulate  the  machinery 
of  a  political  party  in  making  nominations  of  candi- 
dates for  public  office  ?  Can  the  law  take  any  cognizance 
of  political  parties  as  such  ?  Can  the  law  interfere  any- 
wise with  the  modes  and  methods  employed  by  a  political 
party  in  the  nomination  of  its  candidates  for  public 
office  ?  Are  the  provisions  of  the  bill  properly  the  subject 
matter  of  legislation  V  In  reply  the  supreme  court  held : 
"We  do  not  find  any  constitutional  objection  to  the  bill 
submitted  for  our  consideration,  nor  is  our  attention 
called  to  any  provision  of  the  Constitution  as  forbidding 
such  legislation." 

The  decision  of  the  supreme  court  of  New  York  in 
sustaining  the  primary  election  law  of  1899  is  also  of 
considerable  importance,  because  of  the  comprehensive 
scope  of  the  law  and  the  detailed  manner  in  which  it 
regulates  all  political  action  at  the  primary,  in  its  en- 

'  Session  Laws  of  Pennsylvania,  1881,  p.  70. 
•  Leonard  v.  Commonwealth,  112  Pa.  St.  622,  4  Atl.  Rep.  220. 
» In  re  House  BiU  No.  203,  9  Colo.  631. 
23 


35i  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

deavor  *'to  assure  to  all  citizens  equal  rights  in  the  pri- 
mary elections,  conventions,  and  political  committees  of 
the  party  with  which  they  were  allied."  ^ 

In  the  California  and  Oregon  decisions  the  points  at 
issue  were  much  more  involved.  In  the  early  cases,  it 
was  simply  a  question  of  constitutional  power  to  legis- 
late; now  the  decisions  turn  upon  the  constitutionality 
of  the  legislation  itself,  the  power  to  enact  being  con- 
ceded. The  main  grounds  upon  which  the  primary 
election  laws  were  declared  unconstitutional  in  the  CaH- 
fomia  cases  are  the  following:  That  they  were  local  or 
special  legislation;  that  they  enfranchised  persons  who 
would  he  illegal  voters  at  "elections  authorized  by  law;" 
that  they  disfranchised  legal  voters  under  the  Constitu- 
tion ;  that  they  infringed  the  rights  of  political  parties ; 
and  that  they  discriminated  against  the  weaker  parties. 

The  rule  of  local  or  special  legislation  was  applied  by 
the  supreme  court  of  California  to  the  act  of  March  27, 
1895.  It  was  held  that  the  law  being  expressly  con- 
fined in  its  operation  and  effect  to  counties  of  the  first 
and  second  class,  and  not  being  a  regulation  of  the  com- 
pensation of  county  officers,  for  which  purpose  alone 
the  Constitution  provided  for  the  classification  of  coim- 
ties,  was  local,  special,  and  unconstitutional.  There  was 
no  necessity  for  local  legislation,  it  was  claimed,  "be- 
cause the  law  dealt  with  a  subject  matter  to  which  a 
general  law,  having  a  uniform  operation  throughout  the 
State,  could  be  made  applicable."  In  confirmation  of 
this  point,  it  was  clearly  shown  from  an  inspection  of 

•  People  ex  rel.  Coffey  t.  Dem.  Gen'l  Com.  of  Kings  County,  52  Hun  (N.  Y.), 
170,  58  N.  E.  Rep.  \%i. 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     355 

its  terms  that  tlie  law  was  originally  designed  to  applj 
uniformly  tlirougliout  the  State. 

It  was  further  shown  that  the  act  was,  both  generally 
.and  specifically,  made  an  essential  part  of  the  general 
election  law  of  the  State.    Section  21,  for  example,  pro- 
vided that  no  candidate  could  have  his  name  printed 
upon  any  ballot  as  a  candidate  for  public  office  at  any 
general  election  in  the  State,  unless  he  had  been  nomi- 
nated by  a  convention  of  delegates  chosen  in  accordance 
with  the  act.    Eor  this  reason  it  was  not  only  inconsistent 
with  the  Constitution  upon  general  grounds,  but  violated 
the  specific  provision  prohibiting  local  or  special  laws 
for  conducting  elections.    It  was  also  held  that  the  court 
could  not,  by  striking  out  the  section  expressly  limiting 
the  operation  of  the  law  to  two  counties  of  the  State, 
make  it  applicable  throughout  the  State,  as  to  do  so 
would  be  equivalent  to  legislation,  by  imposing  upon 
the  whole  State,  a  law  which  it  was  clear  that  the  legisla- 
ture had  intended  to  apply  only  in  two  counties,  and 
which  would  not  otherwise  have  passed.    These  holdings 
,of  the  court  plainly  exposed  the  inadequacy  of  the  Consti- 
tution to  meet  the  case,  and  emphasized  the  necessity  for 
an  amendment.     It  was  admitted  that  even  though  the 
act  were  good  and  beneficent,  the  State  could  not  enjoy 
its  advantages  because  it  bore  the  stamp  of  special  legis- 
lation, which  was  absolutely  prohibited  by  the  Constitu- 
tion upon  the  assumption  that  special  legislation  is  gen- 
erally bad. 

The  primary  law  of  1895  having  been  declared  un- 
constitutional, the  legislature  passed  another  act  in  1897, 
which  met  with  a  similar  fate  in  the  case  of  Spier  v. 


356  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

Baker. ^  The  objections  raised  in  this  case  did  not  go 
to  the  merits  of  the  direct  vote  system,  but  related  wholly 
to  matters  of  detail  in  working  out  the  scheme  of  the 
election.  One  technical  point  raised  was  that  the  title 
did  not  express  the  full  import  of  the  bill.  It  was  held 
by  the  supreme  court  that  the  insertion  in  the  title  of  the 
words,  "for  other  purposes,"  did  not  have  the  effect  "to 
validate  provisions  of  the  act  which  were  not  germane 
to  the  particular  subject  expressed  in  the  title."  Such 
illegal  provisions  were  found  in  section  12,  which  de- 
clared that  no  person  was  to  be  allowed  to  hold  more 
than  one  proxy  at  any  convention;  section  24,  which 
contained  certain  powers  of  state  conventions;  and 
others.^  It  was  necessary  for  the  primary  election  law 
to  conform  to  the  Constitution  of  the  State,  because  the 
court  considered  such  an  election  as  "authorized  by  law," 
for  the  reasons  that  it  was  mandatory ;  that  it  was  made 
a  public  expense;  and  finally,  that  it  had  already  been 
declared  such  in  a  supreme  court  decision.^ 

The  law  of  1897  did  not  conform  to  the  Constitution, 
and  hence  was  void.  Section  1,  Article  II,  of  the  Consti- 
tution provides:  "Every  native  male  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  every  male  citizen  who  shall  have  ac- 
quired the  rights  of  citizenship  under,  or  by  virtue  of, 
the  treaty  of  Queretaro,  and  every  male  naturalized  cit- 
izen thereof,  who  shall  have  become  such  ninety  days 
prior  to  any  election,  of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years, 
who  shall  have  been  a  resident  of  the  State  one  year 
next  preceding  the  election,  and  of  the  county  in  which 
he  claims  his  vote  ninety  days,  and  in  the  election  pre- 

>  120  Gal.  370,  52  Pac.  Rep.  659. 

a  Sections  13,  17,  33-36. 

»  Marsh  v.  Hanley,  111  Gal.  368. 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     357 

cinct  thirty  days,  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  at  all  elections 
which  are  now  or  may  hereafter  be  authorized  by  law." 
The  provisions  of  the  primary  election  law  were  incon- 
sistent with  these  provisions  of  the  Constitution.  Sec- 
tion 23  of  the  act  enlarged  the  right  of  suffrage  by  re- 
quiring only  a  legal  residence  in  the  county  for  thirty 
days  prior  to  the  election,  as  a  condition  of  suffrage, 
"whereas  the  Constitution  requires  a  legal  residence  in 
the  State  for  one  year,  and  in  the  precinct  thirty  days." 
It  was  also  in  contravention  of  the  Constitution  in  this : 
"that  the  naturalized  citizen  under  the  Constitution  is 
not  entitled  to  vote  unless  his  naturalization  occurred  at 
least  ninety  days  prior  to  the  day  of  election,"  while 
under  section  23  of  the  act,  citizens  made  such  by  nat- 
uralization as  late  as  the  last  day  preceding  the  election 
would  be  entitled  to  vote. 

Section  22  of  the  act  curtailed  the  right  of  suffrage, 
by  declaring  "that  only  those  electors  whose  names  ap- 
pear on  the  great,  or  precinct  registers,  or  the  supple- 
ments thereto,  used  at  the  last  general  election,  are  en- 
titled to  vote."  This  provision  excluded  the  following 
classes  of  electors,  qualified  under  the  Constitution  to 
participate  in  elections,  from  participating  in  the  pri- 
maries held  under  the  act:  (1)  All  native  bom  citizens 
who  had  arrived  at  age  since  the  last  general  election; 
(2)  all  foreign  bom  citizens  naturalized  since  the  last 
general  election,  and  ninety  days  prior  to  the  primary 
election;  (3)  all  electors  who  had  changed  their  resi- 
dence from  one  county  to  another  since  the  last  general 
election;^  (4)   all  electors  who  had  secured  a  residence 

•  The  law  makes  provision  for  the  transfer  of  a  registration,  but  there  are  no 
means  provided  by  which  the  transferred  voter  may  have  his  name  placed  upoa 
the  register  used  at  the  primary  election. 


358  Argument  of  ike  Direct  Primary. 

in  the  State  since  the  last  general  election;  (5)  all 
electors  of  the  State  at  the  last  general  election  who' 
failed  to  have  their  names  placed  upon  the  great,  or  pre- 
cinct registers,  or  the  supplements  thereto,  prior  to  that 
election;  (6)  all  foreign  born  citizens  who  were  natur- 
alized within  ninety  days  next  preceding  the  last  general 
election. 

The  California  law  of  1897  was  declared  unconstitu- 
tional, not  because  of  the  incorporation  of  an  ill^al  test, 
as  is  sometimes  erroneously  believed,  but  because  of  the- 
presence  of  these  specific  provisions  of  suffrage  which 
were  inconsistent  with  like  constitutional  provisions. 
The  court  does  not  pass  decisive  judgment  upon  the 
test.  It  contents  itself  with  "alluding  to"  the  ]X)wer  of 
prescribing  a  test,  and  with  "suggesting"  possible 
dangers  that  might  result  should  the  legislature  impose- 
the  test.  It  goes  on  to  say,  that  even  though  it  be  con- 
ceded that  the  test  provided  for  by  section  17  of  the 
act — a  hona  -fide  present  intention  of  supporting  the 
nominees  selected  by  the  delegates,  is  a  valid  exercise  of 
legislative  power,  and  that  the  primary  elections  pro- 
vided for  by  the  act  are  not  elections  authorized  by  law 
within  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  the  act  is 
nevertheless  unconstitutional  and  void  for  being  special 
legislation,  in  that  it  discriminates  in  favor  of  and 
against  certain  classes  and  individuals,  who  under  the- 
Constitution  are  entitled  to  vote  at  elections.  In  other 
words,  aside  from  the  objections  already  mentioned,  the 
law  was  also  held  unconstitutional  because  it  did  not 
permit  certain  classes  of  voters  who  were  ready  and 
willing  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  test,  to 
participate  in  the  elections. 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     359 

That  the  court  was  not  inclined  to  pass  judgment  upon 
the  power  of  the  legislature  to  prescribe  a  test,  is  clearly 
shown  by  its  language  in  discussing  the  question.  In 
introducing  this  point,  the  words  were  as  follows :  "J/ 
such  a  power  may  be  sustained  under  the  Constitution, 
then  the  life  and  death  of  political  parties,  are  held  in 
the  hollow  of  the  hand  by  a  state  legislature."  ^  The 
court  elaborates  the  possible  dangers  which  might  lurk 
in  such  a  power,  and  closes  with  the  statement,  that 
"the  foregoing  suggestions  are  put  forth  in  order  that 
the  state  legislature  in  the  future  when  dealing  with  this 
question  may  appreciate  the  importance  of  its  work  when 
viewed  in  the  light  of  the  constitutional  difficulty  to  be 
met  and  overcome."  None  of  the  court's  statements  can 
therefore  be  taken  as  declaring  the  test  unconstitutional 
outright,  although  it  might  probably  be  inferred  from 
the  general  sense  of  the  decision  that  while  the  court  for 
the  time  being  contents  itself  with  "merely  suggesting" 
the  difficulties  which  surround  a  test,  it  might  render  a 
more  decisive  and  adverse  judgment  should  another  op- 
portunity present  itself. 

As  a  result  of  the  supreme  court  decision  of  1898, 
declaring  the  law  of  1897  unconstitutional,  a  new  law 
was  enacted  in  1899,  abolishing  the  test  of  a  hona  fids 
present  intention  of  supporting  the  party's  nominees  at 
the  next  election,  and  substituting  the  "open  primary" 
method  under  which  a  secret  and  free  vote  of  any  party's 
primary  election  ticket  was  permitted;  and  also  elimi- 
nating the  other  obnoxious  features  of  the  act  of  1897 
which  had  be«i  declared  in  contravention  of  specific  pro- 
visions of  the  Constitution. 

>  See  p.  343. 


360  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

Fault  was,  nevertheless,  also  found  with  the  act  o£ 
1899,  and  on  July  28,  1900,  the  supreme  court  of  Cali- 
fornia, for  the  third  time,  dealt  a  death  blow  to  a  primary 
election  law  by  declaring  it  in  violation  of  the  Constitu- 
tion.^ The  law  discriminated  against  weak  political 
parties,  "by  providing  an  exclusive  scheme,  controlling 
political  parties,  in  holding  their  conventions  for  the 
nomination  of  candidates  to  public  office,  but  denying 
the  benefits  of  the  act  to  all  political  parties  which  did 
not  cast  at  least  three  per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  at  the 
last  preceding  election."  Such  parties  were  not  allowed 
to  assemble  in  convention  to  choose  nominees  to  be  voted 
for  at  the  primary  election,  and  were  therefore  not  only 
discriminated  against,  but  disfranchised,  by  being  com- 
pelled, if  they  voted  at  all,  to  vote  for  representatives  of 
other  political  parties.  "The  deprivation  of  the  right  of 
selection,  is  a  deprivation  of  the  right  of  franchise."  For 
these  reasons  it  was  held  that  the  law  conflicted  with 
the  Constitution,  Art.  I,  sees.  10,  11,  and  21,  giving  the 
people  the  right  freely  to  assemble  together  to  consult 
for  the  common  good,  and  providing  that  no  citizen,  or 
class  of  citizens,  should  be  gTanted  privileges  or  immun- 
ities, which,  upon  the  same  terms,  were  not  granted  to 
all  other  citizens;  and  that  uniform  operation  was  a 
requisite  of  all  laws  of  a  general  nature. 

The  act  was  also  declared  unconstitutional  upon  the 
ground  that  it  destroyed  the  integrity  of  political  parties. 
"Self-preservation  is  an  inherent  right  of  political  par- 
ties, as  well  as  of  individuals."'  The  law,  by  requir- 
ing the  primary  elections  of  all  political  parties  to  be 

'  Britton  v.  Board,  61  Pac.  Rep.  1115  (Cal.). 

«  Whipple  V.  Broad,  25  Colo.  407,  55  Pac.  Rep.  172. 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     361 

held  at  the  same  time,  and  under  the  control  of  the 
county  board  of  election  commissioners,  and  providing 
for  the  use  of  but  one  ticket,  which  was  received  by  the 
intending  voter  without  question  as  to  his  political  affilia- 
tions, and  taken  into  the  privacy  of  a  booth  where  he 
might  name  such  delegates  as  he  desired  to  the  political 
convention,  of  one  or  another  of  the  political  parties,^ 
whether  he  was  a  member  of  that  party  or  not,  was  held 
to  be  an  unwarrantable  invasion  of  the  rights  of  political 
parties,  and  an  innovation  of  the  rights  reserved  to  the 
people  by  the  Constitution,  Art.  I,  sec.  22,  providing  that 
the  rights  enumerated  in  the  Constitution  shall  not  be 
construed  to  impair  or  deny  others  retained  by  the  peo- 
ple.2 

In  the  dissenting  opinion  it  was  pointed  out  that  the 
provision  which  limits  the  enjoyment  of  the  law  to  those 
political  parties  which  had  cast  at  least  three  per  cent,  of 
the  total  vote  at  the  last  election,  did  not  necessarily 
make  the  act  unconstitutional.^     Under  the  Australian 


'  No  splitting  of  tickets  was  allowed.  "  Any  ballot,  upon  which  any  names 
appear  for  delegates  to  more  than  one  convention  for  the  same  territory,  shall 
be  disregarded."    See  also  p.  365, 

'  Two  judges  concurred  in  the  entire  opinion.  Two  concurred  only  in  part, 
and  the  remaining  two,  including  the  chief  justice,  dissented  from  the  opinion 
in  its  entirety. 

'  The  principle  upon  which  laws  requiring  a  party  to  have  cast  a  certain  per- 
centage of  the  vote  at  a  previous  election,  before  it  acquires  the  right  to  partic- 
ipate as  a  party  in  pubUc  nominations,  are  sustained,  is  well  set  forth  in  the  fol- 
lowing decision:  "  Of  all  the  acts  which  have  been  passed  to  bring  about  this  sys- 
tem of  voting,  I  am  sure  none  can  be  found  which  does  not  in  some  way  circum- 
scribe the  privilege  of  demanding  a  place  upon  the  official  ballot  as  a  party  or 
as  a  candidate  of  a  party.  K  it  was  left  in  the  power  of  each  voter,  or  each 
coterie  of  three  voters,  to  adopt  a  party,  the  polls  would  probably  be  littered 
with  ballots  '  thick  as  autumn  leaves  that  strew  the  brooks  in  Vallambrosa.' 
Great  expense,  labor  and  inconvenience  would  result  without  any  appreciable 
benefit  to  the  voter  or  to  society.  These  regulations  may  not  be  the  wisest  that 
could  have  been  adopted;  still  they  are  regulations  which  do  not  seriously  im- 
pair the  right  of  any  citizen  to  vote.    They  are  intended  to  restrict  the  number 


S62  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary, 

ballot  laws  political  parties  are  classified  in  a  similar 
manner  for  the  purpose  of  determining  which  shall  be- 
included  or  excluded  bj  the  law.  Such  provisions  have 
been  declared  constitutional  by  the  courts  in  several 
States.-^  Where  similar  provisions  are  found  in  primary 
election  laws,  they  undoubtedly  refer  to  similar  great 
classes  of  constitutional  or  extra-constitutional  political 
parties.  Since  the  primary  election  laws  in  which  such 
provisions  are  incorporated  are  a  part  of  those  election 
laws  of  the  State  which  are  controlled  by  provisions  in. 
the  Constitution  relating  to  "elections  authorized  by 
law,"  they  must  also  be  constitutional,  because  similar 
provisions  in  the  Australian  ballot  laws  which  are  a  part 
of  the  same  system  of  election  laws,  and  governed  by  the 
same  constitutional  provisions,  have  repeatedly  been  de- 
clared constitutional. 

Moreover,  in  the  case  of  California,  for  example^ 
where  the  ballot  law  does  not  recognize  a  political  or- 
ganization as  a  party  which  has  failed  to  poll  three  per 
cent,  of  the  total  vote  cast  at  the  last  election,  no  sub- 
stantial benefit  could  be  derived  by  such  a  party  from 
participation  in  a  primary,  as  a  party,  because  the  nomi- 
nees of  conventions  composed  of  delegates  selected  at 
the  primary  election  of  such  a  party,  would  not  be  en- 
titled to  a  place  upon  the  ballot^  at  the  general  election. 
There  could,  hence,  not  be  a  violation  of  a  right  to  partic- 
ipate as  a  party  in  a  nomination  or  election,  because  no 

of  party  tickets  within  reasonable  limits,  while  at  the  same  time  permitting  any- 
body of  citizens  whose  number  is  sufficient  to  give  importance  to  a  concerted 
political  movement  to  organize  as  a  party."  State  v.  Black,  54  N.  J.  L.  446,  24 
Atl.  Rep.  489. 

>  Britton  v.  Board,  61  Pac.  Rep.  1115  (Cal.). 

» Britton  v.  Board,  01  Pac.  Rep.  1119  (Cal.).  Dissenting  opinion  of  Justice, 
Qaroutte. 


ConstitiUionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     363- 

such  right  existed.  For  this  reason  no  constitutional 
objection  could  be  raised  to  the  exclusion  of  parties  at 
primaries  which  would  in  any  event  be  excluded  from 
acting,  as  parties,  at  a  general  election  held  under  the 
protection  of  the  Constitution.* 

A  provision  very  similar  to  that  which  created  the 
difficulty  in  the  California  law  of  1899,  has  recently  in- 
curred the  stamp  of  unconstitutionality  in  Oregon.^ 
The  Oregon  law,  which  was  passed  during  the  last  ses- 
sion of  the  legislature,  provides  tliat  primary  elections 
for  the  nomination  of  all  candidates  shall  be  held  on  the 
same  day,  that  voters  shall  be  given  a  ticket  upon  appli- 
cation containing  the  names  of  candidates  of  all  parties. 
On  the  ticket  the  candidates  are  arranged  on  the  basis 
of  offices  under  their  proper  party  organizations.  The 
voter  takes  the  ticket  into  the  privacy  of  a  booth,  and 
there  in  perfect  secrecy  may  vote  for  the  candidates, 
committeemen,  and  party  principles  and  rules  of  any 
party.  He  must,  however,  confine  himself  to  one  ticket, 
or  if  he  marks  the  tickets  of  several  parties,  only  that 
one  counts  which  contains  a  majority  of  marks. 

This  provision  gives  to  members  of  one  party  an  op- 
portunity to  help  nominate  weak  candidates  on  a  rival 
party's  ticket;  to  aid  in  the  selection  of  its  committee- 
men; and  to  determine  its  principles,  and  its  rules  of 
organization.  In  cases  where  the  vote  is  close,  it  is  barely 
conceivable  that  such  an  opportunity  might  empower 
one  party  to  dictate  in  some  of  these  matters  for  a  rival 

'  This  argument  would  hold  in  every  State  where  the  percentage  party  vote 
of  total  vote  provision  of  the  primary  law  is  identical  with,  or  less  than,  a  simi- 
lar provision  in  t)ie  Australian  ballot  law  as  applied  in  that  particular  State. 

*  Decision  of  circuit  court,  Multnomah  county,  Sept.  21, 1901,  in  the  case  of  the 
Morgan  dii'ect  primary  law. 


364  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary, 

party,  thereby  destroying  the  essence  of  party  organiza- 
tion and  of  party  government.  The  likelihood  of  such 
a  conspiracy  on  the  part  of  one  party  to  defeat  the  proper 
functions  of  another  party,  is  commented  upon  by  the 
court  to  the  effect,  that  "possibly  this  might  not  follow 
in  practice,"  but  it  adds,  "Is  not  any  law  constitutionally 
defective  that  allows  or  permits  such  to  be  done  under 
forms  of  law  V-  The  law  gives  these  outsiders  legal  op- 
portunity, and  power,  so  to  do,  and  furnishes  no  relief 
if  they  do,  and  so  far  as  the  likelihood  of  it  being  done, 
all  know  that  almost  anything  may  be  expected  when- 
ever any  political  advantage  is  to  be  secured  thereby." 
A  thorough  understanding  of  the  political  situation  in 
Oregon  is  necessary  to  a  proper  insight  into  the  circuit 
court  decision  which  declared  the  Morgan  direct  primary 
law  unconstitutional.  Besides  the  Morgan  law,  the 
Lockwood  act  regulating  the  selection  of  delegates  to 
conventions,  which  had  also  been  passed  by  the  last  legis- 
lature, was  up  for  consideration.  ^  The  Lockwood  act 
was  held  to  be  constitutional,  and  the  case  was  then  ap- 
pealed to  the  supreme  court  where  the  decision  of  the 
lower  court  was  affirmed.  The  Lockwood  act  seems  to 
have  been  sustained  by  the  circuit  court  not  only  because 
it  was  strongly  supported  by  previous  supreme  court 
decisions,  but  also,  it  is  claimed,  because  it  was  favored 
by  active,  organized  politicians  to  the  prejudice  of  the 
Morgan  law.     The  Morgan  law,  however,  with  a  provi- 

'  An  eminent  jnris*  answers  "  no  "  to  this  query.  The  courts  "  may  never  de- 
clare a  statute  void,  unless  the  nullity  and  invalidity  of  the  act  are  placed,  in 
their  judgment,  beyond  reasonable  doubt.  A  reasonable  doubt  must  be  solved 
in  favor  of  the  legislative  action,  and  the  act  sustained."  Cooley's  Const.  Lim., 
p.  216. 

"See  p.  227. 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     365 

si  on  for  an  open  primary  system  of  voting,  sucli  as  made 
the  California  law  of  1899  unconstitutional,  lacked  the 
weight  of  favorable  court  decisions,  and  through  a  series 
of  complicated  political  moves  was  left  without  organ- 
ized political  support,  although  a  large  number  of  legis- 
lators had  been  elected  by  virtue  of  their  direct  primary 
pledges.  It  is  but  natural  that  courts  should  be  influ- 
enced by  political  situations.^  The  strong  attack  of  a 
measure  by  powerful  advocates  who  are  sustained  by 
great  political  forces,  as  was  the  case  in  Oregon,  must, 
even  unconsciously,  influence  the  best  judges. 

The  Oregon  court  was  probably  also  influenced  by  the 
California  decision  of  1900.  It  follows  a  very  similar 
course  of  reasoning,  although,  strange  to  say,  it  utterly 
fails  to  take  into  consideration  an  important  difference 
between  the  unconstitutional  features  of  the  Oregon  and 
of  the  California  laws.  The  California  law  provides: 
*'That  any  ballot  upon  which  any  names  apj^ear  for  dele- 
gates to  more  than  one  convention  jor  the  same  territory, 

•  The  Republican  party  of  Multnomah  county,  with  a  voting  strength  about 
twice  that  of  the  Democratic  party,  is  controlled  by  the  Simon  and  Mitchel 
factions.  One  writer  describes  the  situation  with  reference  to  the  Morgan  law  as 
follows:  "  A  Democratic  politician  looks  at  the  direct  primary  law  in  this  county 
thus:  If  it  is  a  success,  it  will  unite  the  Republican  party  in  the  coimty  and 
leave  no  hope  whatever  for  any  Democratic  office-seeker.  As  a  result  of  the 
break  up  of  the  last  campaign,  our  district  attorney  is  a  Democrat.  He  was 
nominally  in  control  of  the  suit,  and  took  his  stand  against  the  Morgan  law. 
Every  political  force  was  against  the  law.  The  now  apparently  strongest  fac- 
tion of  the  Republican  party  was  supporting  a  law  (Lockwood  act)  whose  mere 
enactment  was  a  reflection  upon  the  Morgan  law.  The  Democrats  were  sup- 
porting the  same  law,  and  the  first  advocate  of  direct  primaries  (Mr.  Bingham) 
was  fighting  the  Morgan  law  with  all  his  might,  and  fighting  for  a  fee  in  line  with 
the  inveterate  enemy  of  all  his  own  ideas.  At  one  time  duiing  the  last  spilng 
our  only  paper  came  out  with  a  strong  editorial  in  favor  of  the  Morgan  law. 
But  the  editor  seems  to  have  been  called  down  since  no  similar  utterance  was 
ever  heard.  The  Simon  faction  has  also  openly  opposed  the  reform,  save  where 
it  was  deemed  good  policy  to  get  under  cover,  as  they  did  in  the  campaign 
pledges." 


-3G6  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

^shall  bo  disregarded."  That  is  to  say,  no  ballot  sliall 
contain  names  of  candidates  for  delegates  to  more  than 
one  state  convention,  or  more  than  one  district  conven- 
tion, or  more  than  one  local  convention,  or  more  than 
one  city  convention.  This  does  not  permit  the  Republi- 
<;an  voter  to  vote  for  delegates  to  a  Republican  and  to 
a  Democratic  state  convention,  or  district  convention, 
or  local  convention,  but  it  does  allow  him  to  vote  for  dele- 
gates to  a  Republican  state  convention,  to  a  Democratic 
district  convention,  and  to  a  Populistic  local  convention, 
and  to  have  his  votes  count  on  the  tickets  of  each  of 
;those  parties. 

The  Oregon  law  however,  only  permitted  the  voter  to 

■choose  what  ticket  he  desired  to  vote  and  to  have  his 

vote  count  upon  that  ticket,  and  in  case  he  voted  on  sev- 

-eral  tickets,  only  the  one  containing  the  largest  number 

•^f  marks  was  canvassed.     lie  was,  therefore,  confined 

to  one  tkhet,  while  under  the  California  law,  he  could 

vote  effectively  upon  the  tickets  of  several  parties.  This 

significant  difference  between  the  two  laws  seems  to  be 

-entirely  overlooked  in  the  Oregon  decision,  and  while  it 

-might  not  have  been  of  vital  influence  in  determining 

the  Oregon  case,  it  certainly  greatly  strengthened  the 

position  of  the  California  court. 

Both  the  California  and  the  Oregon  courts  laid  par- 
ticular stress  upon  the  existence  of  an  "opportunity" 
for  members  of  one  party  to  dictate  the  action  of  an- 
other party  at  the  primary,  without  the  presence  of  a 
remedy  in  case  they  did  so.  If  the  courts  continue  to 
base  their  decisions  upon  the  "opportunity,"  the  "possi- 
bility," instead  of  upon  the  practical  "probability"  in- 
^volved,  then  every  form  of  open  primary  system  would 


€onsiitutio7iaUty  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     367 

be  iinconstitutioTial,^  and  resort  to  a  test  of  one  kind  or 
other  would  be  the  only  Avaj  out  of  the  difficulty. 

Upon  grounds  similar  to  those  advanced  by  the  Pa- 
cific courts,  the  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin,  if  enacted, 
might  have  been  declared  unconstitutional.^  The  voter 
was  given  a  similar  "opportunity"  fraudulently  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  nomination  of  a  rival  party's  candidates. 
The  Stevens  bill,  however,  contained  an  ameliorating  dif- 
ference from  tlie  laws  of  California  and  Oregon,  in  that 
the  voter  forfeited  his  entire  ballot,  if  he  attempted  to 
vote  on  more  than  one  ticket.  This  provision  would  have 
operated  as  a  deterring  influence  in  preventing  even  the 
attempt  to  split  tickets.  Moreover  the  Stevens  bill  also 
removed  the  strong  inducement  to  forsake  the  party  of 
one's  choice,  by  permitting  the  voter  to  cast  his  ballot 
for  any  good  men  on  other  tickets,  by  writing  their 
names  on  his  own  ballot,  and  having  such  votes  count 
toward  the  nomination  of  the  preferred  candidates  for 
the  respective  offices  in  his  own  party. 

But  while  these  strong  provisions  of  the  Stevens  bill 
might  have  reduced  even  the  probability  of  voting  with 
a  rival  party  to  a  minimum,  the  possibility  of  voting 
with  that  i^arty  would  still  have  remained.  Just  why 
a  court  should  base  its  decision  upon  this  fact,  does  not 
seem  quite  clear  and  consistent.  Among  our  publio 
institutions  in  general,  and  among  our  political  institu- 
tions in  particular,  there  are  those  which  present  the 
opportunity  for  doing  a  great  wrong ;  yet  the  institutions 
remain  with  us  because  the  opportunity  is  never,  or  sel- 
dom, seized,  and  because  the  good  which  they  do  out- 

'  This  was  not  true  of  the  original  bill  which  required  a  declaration  of  party 
affiliation. 


368  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

weighs  the  bad.  Under  the  Wisconsin  caucus  law,  for 
example,  the  opportunity  is  presented  to  the  Democrat 
to  attend  the  Republican  primary  and  to  help  nominate 
any  Republican  candidate.  There  is  nothing  to  prevent 
a  large  number  of  Democrats  from  voting  in,  and  con- 
trolling a  Republican  caucus,  even  though  the  Republi- 
cans know  of  their  presence,  and  protest  against  their 
participation.  The  only  thing  that  tends  to  prevent 
such  fraudulent  action  is  the  fact,  that  since  under  the 
present  Wisconsin  law  but  one  caucus  may  be  attended, 
every  Democrat  forfeits  his  entire  right  to  aid  in  the 
nomination  of  candidates  at  the  Democratic  caucus.  But 
as  far  as  the  "possibility"  of  voting  with  an  opposing 
party,  is  concerned,  it  exists  just  as  clearly  as  it  possibly 
could  under  any  open  primary  system  which  might  be 
devised. 

The  circuit  court  of  Oregon  does  not  share  in  the 
opinion  of  the  author  in  reviewing  the  situation  in  its 
own  State,  where  a  provision  similar  to  that  incorporated 
in  the  Wisconsin  caucus  law  is  in  operation.  It  holds, 
that  "under  the  existing  primary  law  an  elector  openly 
visits  some  one  of  the  party  primary  elections,  as  has  al- 
ways been  the  case  from  time  immemorial."  By  that  open 
action  he  affiliates  himself  with  that  party,  and  by  so 
doing  "he  is  but  exercismg  his  privilege,  and  is  sure  of 
a  cordial  welcome  in  any  party,  especially  where  there 
is  a  shortage  of  votes.  The  situation  is  vastly  different 
from  that  where  law  makes  it  obligatory  on  one  party 
to  submit  its  nominations  or  party  politics  to  a  secret 
ballot  of  all  voters  of  all  parties,  or  of  no  party  at  all, 
without  any  manifestation  of  party  affiliation  on  the 
part  of  the  voter,  or  test  of  party  affiliation  whatsoever." 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     369 

Tlie  fact  that  the  practice  dates  "from  time  immemo- 
rial" does  not  necessarily  prove  its  constitutionality, 
while  acquiescence  in  the  results  of  the  primary,  no  mat- 
ter who  determined  its  action,  is  as  "obligatoiy"  under 
the  caucus  law,  as  it  would  be  under  the  direct  primary 
law.  Apparently  the  only  difference  in  the  situation, 
and  it  does  not  appear  to  be  so  very  "vast,"  is,  that  while 
under  the  direct  primary  law,  the  voter  has  the  oppor- 
tunity to  vote  fraudulently  with  a  rival  party,  in  the 
privacy  of  a  booth,  under  the  present  caucus  law  he  must 
do  so  openly.  This  would  undoubtedly  keep  those  voters^ 
whom  false  self-respect  and  hypocrisy  forbid  tO'  do  in 
public  what  they  would  do  unscrupulously  in  secret^ 
from  transgressing  the  spirit  of  the  law,  but  beyond  that^ 
and  manifestly  upon  no  suggestion  of  principle,  there 
is,  it  seems,  no  difference  in  the  two  cases.  The  "possi- 
bility," or  "opportunity,"  for  wrong  exists  as  plainly 
under  the  one  as  under  the  other.  That  the  court  bases 
its  decision  upon  the  vague  and  shadowy  "possibility" 
of  wrong  rather  than  upon  even  a  remote  probability,  is 
plainly  indicated  when  it  says,  "possibly  this  (the  voting 
of  a  rival  party's  ticket)  might  not  follow  in  practice, 
but  is  not  any  law  constitutionally  defective  that  allows 
or  permits  such  to  be  done  under  forms  of  law  ?"^ 
Since  the  difference  between  the  two  cases,  as  already 

'  Established  rules  of  constitutional  law  seem  to  answer  this  question  with  an 
emphatic  "no."  "When  the  constitutionality  of  a  statute  is  questioned,  the 
court  will  not  presume  that  the  legislature  acted  outside  of  its  legitimate  sphere. 
This  is  a  fact  which  must  be  established  by  the  one  who  attacks  the  constitu- 
tionaUty  of  the  statute.  Counsel  relies  largely  upon  the  possibilities  of  abuse  in 
the  operation  of  the  law  if  it  should  be  upheld,  and  assume  that  its  abuse  would 
follow.  By  this  mode  of  reasoning  most  of  our  statutes  might  be  held  imconsti- 
tutional."  Argument  of  Hon.  E.  Ray  Stevens  before  supreme  coiut  in  State  of 
Wisconsin  v.  Garrett  Lammers. 
24 


370  Arguinent  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

suggested,  seems  to  be  slight,  and  of  such  a  nature  as 
not  to  affect  the  "possibility"  element  involved,  it  fol- 
lows that  if  a  direct  primary  law  containing  the  open  pri- 
mary system  is  unconstitutional,  then  all  existing  indi- 
rect primary  or  caucus  laws  containing  such  provision, 
as,  for  example,  the  Oregon  and  the  Wisconsin  laws, 
must  be  unconstitutional  when  judged  by  the  same  prin- 
ciple. 

There  is  good  reason  for  believing  that  an  open  pri- 
mary would  in  most  cases  be  successful,^  and  it  seems 
that  when  the  courts  base  their  decisions  too  absolutely 
upon  the  "possibilities,"  of  wrongful  action  involved, 
rather  than  upon  the  "probabilities,"  they  permit  out- 
grown legal  principles  to  override  practical  justice,  and 
cast  upon  judicial  action  the  imputation  of  political  in- 
fluence. Should  the  courts  by  adhering  strictly  to  legal 
reasoning,  regardless  of  the  practical  aspects  of  the  sit- 
uation, continue  to  declare  primary  election  laws  which 
contain  the  open  primary  system  unconstitutional,  it 
would  be  necessary  to  devise  some  compromise  system 
wherever  no  absolute  test  of  party  affiliation  is  desired. 

The  following  method  is  proposed  as  a  probable  solu- 
tion of  the  difficulty.  Make  the  test  in  form  like  the 
one  incorporated  in  the  New  York  enrollment  system 
by  requiring  a  declaration  of  general  sympathy  with  the 
principles  of  the  party,  and  of  an  intention  to  generally 
support  its  candidates  at  the  next  election.  Add  to  this 
the  provision  of  the  Stevens  bill  of  Wisconsin  and,  in 
modified  form,  of  the  Morgan  law  of  Oregon,  permitting 
the  voter  to  cast  his  ballot  for  any  good  man  upon  some 

>  For  a  discussion  of  the  open  primary  system,  see  p.  834. 


Constitutionality  of  Pri  nary  Election  Laws.     371 

other  ticket  by  writing  the  name  of  the  preferred  candi- 
date in  a  reserved  space  on  his  own  ticket,  and  have  it 
count  as  a  nominating  vote  for  the  given  ofl&ce  on  that 
ticket. 

Such  a  test  removes  the  legal  "possibility"  whereby 
one  party  is  enabled  to  dictate  the  action  of  another 
party.  It  preserves  to  the  greatest  possible  extent  the 
secrecy  of  the  ballot,  without  presenting  the  opportunity 
of  defeating  proper  party  activity.  It  removes  the  ob- 
jection of  unconstitutionality,  advanced  against  a  declar- 
ation to  support  all  of  the  party's  nominees  unquali- 
fiedly, in  that  it  does  not  reveal  for  what  particular 
candidates  of  the  party  votes  \a\\  be  cast  at  the  general 
election.  It  overcomes  the  objection  of  the  possibility 
of  "macliine"  control  which  is  advanced  where  a  voter 
is  compelled  to  declare  his  party  affiliation,  and  to  vote 
a  straight  party  ticket,  because  it  is  impossible  to  tell 
whether  he  votes  for  some  or  all  of  the  candidates  named 
on  his  ticket,  or  whether  he  writes  the  names  of  candi- 
dates which  appear  upon  other  tickets  in  their  places. 
It  avoids  publicity  at  the  primary,  and  does  not  violate 
the  secrecy  of  the  ballot  at  the  general  election.  It  com- 
pels the  voter  to  identify  himself  with  some  party,  with- 
out revealing  the  exact  extent  to  which  he  does  so.  It 
protects  party  organizations,  without  permitting  poli- 
ticians to  exercise  undue  influence.  It  therefore  com- 
bines the  main  advantages  of  closed  and  of  open  pri- 
maries, and  avoids  all  conflict  with  State  Constitutions 
or  established  principles  of  law. 

The  recent  decision  of  the  supreme  court  of  Oregon 
declaring  the  Lockwood  act  constitutional  is  a  signal 


372  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary, 

victory  for  primary  reform  in  that  State. -^  Tlie  act  ap- 
plies to  all  cities  having  a  population  of  10,000  or  more 
inhabitants  for  the  selection  of  delegates  to  conventions. 
The  main  points  of  the  decision  may  be  summarized  as 
follows ;  The  law  is  not  local,  because  "the  classification 
is  one  founded  upon  some  real  and  substantial,  not  fan- 
ciful, distinction,  suggested  and  prompted  by  reason  and 
experience."  The  election  provided  for  by  the  act  comes 
within  the  purview  of  the  Constitution  as  an  election  au- 
thorized by  law.  The  court  "sees  no  objection  to  the 
legislature  providing  for  party  elections,  and  limiting 
the  electoral  privilege  to  party  members."  The  limi- 
tation of  the  benefits  of  the  act  to  the  stronger  parties  is 
no  infringement  or  denial  of  a  constitutional  right.  It 
is  a  reasonable  regulation,  "justified  by  the  substantial 
difference  in  party  conditions,"  and  aiming  to  secure  a 
free  and  equal  ballot,  as  in  case  of  the  analogous  provi- 
sions found  in  our  Australian  ballot  laws.  The  rights  of 
political  parties  are  not  invaded  because  "party  man- 
agement is  of  such  vital  importance  to  the  public  and  the 
State,  that  its  operation,  in  so  far  as  it  respects  the 
naming  of  candidates  for  public  ofiice,  is  an  object  of 
special  legislative  concern,  to  see  that  the  purposes  of 
the  Constitution  are  not  perv^erted,  and  the  people  shorn 
of  a  free  choice."  The  legislature  may  regulate  the  ap- 
pointment of  primary  election  officers,  and  the  election 
of  party  committeemen,  as  well  as  fix  their  terms  of  office 
and  specify  their  duties.  The  test  of  party  affiliation  is 
reasonable  and  valid.  "The  expense  is  incident  to  and 
in  pursuance  of  a  general  law  of  the  State,  although  it 

>  Ladd  T.  Holmes  (Greg.),  decided  Nov.  25, 1901. 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     373 

operates  locally,  and  is  properly  a  county  charge."  Tlio 
court  by  thus  disposing  of  these  difficult  questions  has 
set  a  most  important  and  encouraging  landmark  in  the 
constitutional  history  of  primary  election  laws. 

In  California  we  have  an  excellent  illustration  of 
"what  must  happen  where  State  Constitutions  prevent 
the  enactment  of  good  primary  legislation.  After  three 
adverse  decisions,  which  completely  cornered  the  legisla- 
ture by  interposing  the  Constitution  between  that  body 
and  desired  primary  election  laws,  there  was  nothing 
else  to  do  but  to  amend  the  Constitution.  This  was  so 
effectively  carried  out,  that  there  can  no  longer  be  any 
difficulty.  It  is  safe  to  say,  that  even  though  the  courts  of 
other  States  should  follow  the  example  of  the  California 
courts  and  declare  primary  election  laws  unconstitu- 
tional, the  time  must  soon  come  when  legal  modifications 
will  be  made,  and  constitutional  amendments,  if  neces- 
saiy,  will  be  enacted,  enabling  the  public  to  enjoy  the 
benefits  of  good  legislation  wherever  it  is  to-day  being 
denied  to  the  people  through  the  intervention  of  con- 
stitutional law. 


SUMMARY  OF  IMPORTANT  POINTS  RAISED  IN  JUDI- 
CIAL DECISIONS  BEARING  UPON  PRIMARY  LEGIS- 
LATION. 

General  Construction  of  a  Primary  Election  Law. 

A  remedial  statute  for  the  correction  of  abuses,  and  to  se- 
cure against  fraud  and  corruption,  is  to  be  liberally  construed. 
The  presumption  is  in  favor  of  such  an  act,  and  the  uncon- 
stitutionality must  not  be  left  in  doubt.  An  objection  that 
the  law  violates  principles  of  republican  government  is  in- 
sufficient, unless  it  violates  the  Constitution.  Cooley  on  Con- 
stitutional Limitations,  p.  202   (6th  ed.). 


374  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

The  settled  conviction  that  the  safeguarding  of  our  institu- 
tions requires  the  untrammeled  exercise  of  the  franchise,  and 
that  the  result  be  protected  from  fraud,  has  led  to  much  legis- 
lation during-  the  present  generation,  and  laiterly  to  legislation 
that  aims  to  secure  these  results  by  regulating  primaries. 
People  ex  rel.  Coffey  v.  Dem.  Gen'l  Com.  of  Kings  County, 
52  Hun  (N.  Y.),  170. 

By  reason  of  the  legislature  having  adopted  the  act,  there 
goes  with  it  a  presumption  that  it  is  within  the  pale  of  the 
fundamental  law,  otherwise  it  would  not  have  met  with  the 
approval  of  that  body;  and  in  every  case  where  there  exists, 
when  proper  tests  have  been  brought  to  bear,  a  rational  doubt 
upon  the  subject  it  should  be  resolved  in  favor  of  its  validity. 
Ladd  v.  Holmes,  66  Pac.  Rep.  714  (Oreg.  1901). 

Exclusion  of  Small  Parlies. 

The  election  laws  that  confine  nominations  by  convention 
method  to  the  political  parties  that  cast  a  certain  percentage 
of  the  vote,  are  upheld  as  constitutional  in  the  following  cases: 
State  V.  Black,  54  N.  J.  L.  446;  State  ex  rel.  Plummer  v.  Bos- 
ton, 58  Ohio  St.  620;  State  v.  Anderson,  42  L.  R.  A.  239;  Hig- 
gins  V.  Berg,  42  L.  R.  A.  245;  Miner  v.  Olin,  159  Mass.  487; 
De  Walt  v.  Bartley,  146  Pa.  St.  54b. 

Elections  Authorized  by  Law. 

Primary  elections  are  not  within  the  term  "all  elections 
authorized  by  law,"  as  found  in  State  Constitutions.  Mayor  v. 
Shattuck,  19  Colo.  194;  People  v..  Cavanaugh,  112  Cal.  647; 
Nominations  of  Public  Officers,  9  Colo.  631;  Com.  v.  Wells,  17 
W.  N.  C.  164;  Leonard  v.  Commonwealth,  112  Pa.  St.  622. 

In  spite  of  the  adjective  "all,"  the  word  "elections"  has  a 
restricted  m.eaning  in  the  '.erm  "all  elections"  as  decided  in 
case  of  the  analogous  term  "all  officers."     David  v.  Portland 
Water  Com'rs,  14  Oreg.  98;  State  ex  rel.  v.  George,  22  Oreg. 
152;   Wheeler  v.  Brady,  15  Kan.  30;   Winans  v.  Williams,  5 
Kan.  133;    In  the  matter  of  Gage,  141  N.  Y.  112.     The  word 
"elections"  is  also  said  to  be  used  in  a  restricted  sense  in 
Plummer  v.  Jost,   144  111.   68;    State  v.  Cones,   15   Neb.  444 
Belles  v.   Burr,    76   Mich.   1;    Board   v.   State,    70   Miss.    769 
Buckner  v.  Gordon,  81  Ky.  1;  Stat©  v.  Parry,  52  Kan.  1. 

Because  of  difCerences  in  primai-y   election  laws,  constitu- 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     375 

tional  proYisions,  and  methods  of  legal  reasoning,  several  courts 
have  in  recent  decisions  come  to  what  seems  a  most  logical 
conclusion,  that  primary  elections  are  "elections  authorized  by 
law,"  and  subject  to  all  constitutional  provisions  governing 
such  elections.  "It  seems  hardly  a  matter  of  serious  contro- 
versy that  the  elections  presently  provided  for  are  such  as  are 
authorized  by  law.  They  are,  in  practical  effect,  required  to 
be  held  by  all  parties  polling  a  3  per  cent,  vote,  as  no  convention 
nomination  can  be  legally  made  unless  the  delegates  attend- 
ing such  convention  from  the  precincts  included  within  a 
city  falling  within  the  class  prescribed,  are  selected  at  such 
primary  election.  The  judges  of  election  appointed  under  the 
general  law  are  authorized  and  required  to  preside  at  the  pri- 
mary election,  and  to  count  and  certify  the  vote;  and  the 
county  clerk,  a  public  functionary,  is,  with  the  assistaace  of 
two  justices  of  the  peace,  required  to  make  abstracts  from  the 
returns,  and  thereupon  to  publish  the  result,  the  delegates 
receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes  being  entitled  to  sit  in 
the  convention,  and  the  election  is  held  at  public  expense. 
With  all  this  there  is  certainly  an  election  authorized  by  law." 
Ladd  V.  Holmes,  66  Pac.  Kep.  714  (Oreg.  1901);  also.  Marsh  v. 
Hanley,  111  Cal.  368,  43  Pac.  Rep.  975  (1896);  Spier  v.  Baker, 
120  Cal.  370,  52  Pac.  Rep.  659  (1898).  "That  a  compulsory  pri- 
mary law,  such  as  this,  forms  a  part  of  the  general  election 
laws  of  the  State,  is  not,  we  think,  debatable,  and  has  been 
distinctly  decided."    Britton  v.  Board,  61  Pac.  Rep.  1115  (1900). 

Expense. 

The  expense  in  case  of  a  local  law  may  be  placed  upon  the 
county.  The  State  is  interested  in  the  object  to  be  secured  by 
a  primary  election  law,  the  protecting  of  the  elective  franchise 
from  fraud,  and  the  county  may  properly  be  designated  by 
legislative  action  for  carrying  out  the  purpose,  providing  no 
existing  debt  is  shouldered  upon  the  county.  Simon  v.  Nor- 
throp, 27  Oreg.  487;  Johnson  v.  Yuba  Co.,  37  Pac.  Rep.  528; 
Marion  Co.  Com'rs  v.  Center  Township,  107  Ind.  584.  "The 
expense  Is  incident  to  and  in  pursuance  of  a  general  law  of 
the  State,  although  it  operates  locally.  The  election  is  for 
the  selection  of  precinct  delegates  and  officers,  which  is  prop- 
erly a  county  charge."  Ladd  r.  Holmes  (Oreg.),  Nov,  25, 
1901. 


376  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

Members  of  weak  political  parties  which  are  not  included 
in  a  primary  election  law  may  be  taxed  to  pay  the  expense  in- 
curred by  such  a  law.  The  right  of  suffrage  and  taxation  have 
no  relation  to  each  other  except  through  specific  legislative 
enactment.  The  public  good  justifies  the  taxation  of  all  citi- 
zens. Black,  Con.  Law,  337,  339;  Cooley,  Const.  Lim.,  599  et 
seq.;   Cooley,  Taxation,  107. 

What  Constitutes  a  Local  Act? 

"A  statute  which  is  plainly  intended  to  affect  a  particular 
person  or  thing,  or  to  become  operative  in  a  particular  place 
or  locality,  and  looks  to  no  broader  or  enlarged  application, 
may  be  aptly  characterized  as  special  and  local."  Ladd  v. 
Holmes  (Oreg.),  Nov.  25,  1901.  Also,  State  ex  rel  v.  Mitchell, 
31  Ohio  St.  592;  State  ex  rel.  v.  Anderson,  44  Ohio  St.  247; 
Mott  V.  Hubbard,  59  Ohio  St.  199;  Nichols  v.  Walter,  supra; 
Edmonds  r.  Herbrandson,  supra;  Devine  v.  Commissioners, 
84  111.  590;  Commissioners  ex  rel.  v.  Patton,  88  Pa.  St.  258. 

A  primary  election  law  applying  only  to  cities  does  not 
discriminate  against  the  counties,  and  is  general  in  charac- 
ter. All  who  fall  within  the  class  or  the  conditions  covered 
by  its  terms  are  protected  by  its  safeguards  and  made  amena- 
ble to  its  penalties.  Such  a  law  confers  equal  rights  on  all 
citizens  of  a  State,  or  subjects  them  to  equal  burdens,  and 
inflicts  equal  penalties  on  every  person  who  violates  it,  and  is 
an  equal  law,  though  no  one  can  enjoy  the  right,  be  subjected 
to  the  burden,  or  infringe  its  provisions,  without  going  to  or 
being  in  a  particular  part  of  the  State.  State  v.  Griffin,  39 
Atl.  Rep.  260;  In  re  Oberg,  21  Oreg.  406;  Soon  Hing  v.  Crowley, 
113  U.  S.  70;  Parbeir  v.  Connelly,  113  U.  S.  32;  Railroad  Co. 
V.  Beckwith,  129  U.  S.  26;  State  ex  rel,  v.  Frazier  (Oreg.),  59 
Pac.  Rep.  5;  State  v.  Frazier   36  Oreg.  178. 

"A  law  may  be  general,  however,  and  have  but  a  local  appli- 
cation, and  it  is  none  the  less  general  and  uniform  because 
it  may  apply  to  a  designated  class  if  it  operates  equally  upon 
all  the  subjects  within  the  class  for  which  the  rule  is  adopted; 
and  in  determining  whether  a  law  is  general  or  special,  the 
court  will  look  to  its  substance  and  necessary  operation,  as  well 
as  to  its  form  and  phraseology.  *  *  *  The  classification 
may  not  be  arbitrary.  *  *  *  The  mark  of  distinction  must 
be  something  of  substance,  some  attendant  or  inherent  pecul- 


Constitutionality  of  Primary  Election  Laws.     377 

iarity  calling  for  legislation  suggested  by  natural  reason  of 
different  character  to  subserve  the  rightful  demands  of  gov- 
ernmental needs."  Ladd  v.  Holmes  (Oreg.),  Nov.  25,  1901. 
Also  State  v.  Black,  54  N.  J.,  L.  446;  Edmonds  v.  Herbrandson, 
2  N.  Dak.  270;  Suth.  Stat.  Const,  127,  128;  Nicholas  v.  Walter, 
supra:  Evans  v.  Herbrandson,  supra;  State  ex  rel.  v.  Ham- 
mer, 42  N.  J.  L.  435;  People  ex  rel.  v.  Board  of  Supervisors, 
185  HI.  288;  State  ex  rel.  Van  Riper  v.  Parsons,  40  N.  J.  L.  1. 

The  density  of  population  in  larger  cities  and  counties  fur- 
nishes a  proper  basis  for  their  reasonable  classification  for 
the  purpose  of  election  regulations.  Commonwealth  v.  McClel- 
land, 83  Ky.  694;  People  v.  Hoffman,  116  111.  587;  People  v. 
Board  of  Supervisors,  185  HI.  288;  Hargrave  v.  Reitz,  62  Ind. 
159;  City  of  Indianapolis  v.  Navin,  151  Ind.  139;  Tuttle  v. 
Polk,  92  Iowa,  433. 

A  classification  of  cities  or  counties  for  purposes  of  election 
regulation  based  upon  reasonable  grounds,  is  not  objectionable, 
although  but  one  city  or  county  is  within  the  class.  Smith  v. 
Doggett,  14  Ind.  442  (1860);  Groesch  v.  State,  42  Ind.  547 
(1873);  Hanlon  v.  Board  of  Commissioners,  53  Ind.  123 
(1876);  McLaughlin  v.  B.  &  L.  Ass'n,  62  Ind.  264  (1878); 
State  ex  rel.  Hargrave  v.  Reitz,  62  Ind.  159  (1878);  City  of 
Indianapolis  v.  Navin,  151  Ind.  139  (1897);  Bell  v.  Maish, 
137  Ind.  226  (1894);  McAnnich  v.  Miss.  &  Mo.  R.  R.  Co.,  20 
Iowa,  338  (1886);  Haskel  v.  City  of  Burlington,  30  Iowa,  232 
(1870);  Iowa  R,  R.  Land  Co.  v.  Soper,  39  Iowa,  112  (1874); 
Tuttle  V.  Polk,  92  Iowa,  433  (1894);  State  v.  City  of  Des 
Moines,  96  Iowa,  521  (1896);  State  ex  rel.  "Witter  v.  Forkiner, 
28  L.  R.  A.  206;  Welker  v.  Potter,  18  Ohio  St.  85;  Bronson  v. 
Oberlin,  41  Ohio  St.  476;  State  v.  Toledo,  48  Ohio  St.  211; 
People  v.  Wallace,  70  111.  680;  People  v.  Onahan,  170  111.  449 
(1897);  People  v.  Hoffman,  116  111.  587;  People  ex  rel.  Green 
V.  Com'rs  of  Cook  Co.,  176  111.  576  (1898);  People  ex  rel. 
Akin  V.  Board  of  Supervisors,  185  111.  288;  Kilgore  v.  Magee, 
85  Pa.  St.  401  (1877);  Wheeler  v.  Philadelphia,  77  Pa.  St. 
328  (1875);  Seabolt  v.  Com'rs,  187  Pa.  St.  318  (1898);  Com- 
monwealth V.  Buckley,  9  Pa.  Dist.  Rep.  381;  Van  Riper  v. 
Parsons,  40  N.  J.  L.  1  (1878);  State  ex  rel.  Rutgers  v.  City 
of  New  Brunswick,  42  N.  J.  L.  51  (1880);  State  ex  rel.  Bum- 
sted  V.  Govern,  47  N.  J.  L.  368  (1885);  State  v.  Mayor,  etc.  of 
Jersey  City,  33  Atl.  Rep.  740;  State  ex  rel.  Varney  v.  Kramer, 


378  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

41  Atl.  Rep.  711  (1S98);  In  re  Application  of  Thomas  Church, 
etc.,  92  N.  Y.  1  (1883) ;  People  v.  Squire,  107  N.  Y.  593  (1888)  ; 
People  V.  Dunn,  52  N.  E.  Rep.  572  (1899);  Darrow  v.  The 
People,  8  Colo.  417  (1885);  Thomason  v.  Ash  worth,  73  Cal. 
73  (1887);  Tulare  Co.  v.  May,  118  Cal.  303  (1897);  State  ex 
rel.  Board  v.  Cooley,  56  Minn.  540  (1894);  Nichols  v.  Walter, 
37  Minn.  264  (1887);  State  v.  Spande,  37  Minn.  322  (1887); 
State  ex  rel.  Manning  v.  Higgins,  125  Mo.  364  (1894);  Dunne 
V.  Kansas  City  Cable  Ry.  Co.,  131  Mo.  1  (1895);  State  ex  rel. 
Garrett  v.  Arnold,  136  Mo.  446  (1896);  City  of  St.  Louis  r. 
Dorr,  145  Mo.  466  (1898-);  Glover  v,  Meinrath,  133  Mo.  292 
(1895);  Johnson  v  City  of  Milwaukee,  88  Wis.  383  (1894); 
Boyd  V.  Milwaukee,  92  Wis.  456  (1896);  Hughes  v.  Lagard, 
43  Pac.  Rep.  442  (1896);  Harwood  v.  Wentworth,  162  U.  S. 
547  (1896);  Holmes  &  Bull  Furniture  Co.  v.  Hedges,  13 
Wash.  696  (1896);  Commonwealth  v.  McClelland,  83  Ky. 
694;  Stone  v.  Wilson,  39  S.  W.  Rep.  49  (1897);  State  v. 
Frank,  83  N.  W.  Rep.  74;  State  ex  rel.  TVTieeler  v.  Stuhl,  52 
Neb.  209;  Hann  v.  State,  54  Pac.  Rep.  130  (1898);  Mitchell  v. 
City  of  Topeka,  54  Pac.  Rep.  292  (1898);  Codlin  v.  Kohl- 
housen,  9  N.  M.  565;  Peterson  v.  State,  56  S.  W.  Rep.  127. 

The  penal  provisions  of  a  general  statute  or  of  an  other- 
wise valid  local  statute,  are  not  obnoxious  to  the  constitu- 
tional inhibition  of  local  laws  punishing  crimes  and  misde- 
meanors. State  V.  Sly,  4  Oreg.  277;  State  v.  Bergman,  6 
Oreg.  341;  Marmet  v.  State,  45  Ohio  St.  63;  State  v.  Pond,  93 
Mo.  606.  "The  offenses  alluded  to  are  creatures  of  and  in- 
cident to  the  act,  and  it  being  general  the  punishment  was 
properly  provided  for."  Ladd  Y.  Holmes  (Oreg.),  Nov.  25, 
1901. 


CHAPTEK  XI. 

THE  EXPENSE  OF  DIRECT  PRIMARIES. 

The  expense  of  holding  primary  elections  may  be  met 
either  by  the  political  parties  or  by  the  State.  Where 
primaries  are  made  a  public  expense  to  be  paid  out  of 
the  general  treasury  the  cry  is  raised  that  an  unjust  bur- 
den is  being  placed  upon  the  tax-payer ;  that  the  caucus 
and  convention  system  costs  the  people  of  the  State  noth- 
ing whatever.  Before  going  into  the  merits  of  this  ques- 
tion it  may  be  well  to  see  how  the  expense  arises,  and 
what  specific  methods  are  resorted  to  for  its  defrayal. 

The  source  of  the  expense  in  case  of  primary  elections 
is  very  similar  to  that  of  general  elections.  Notices  must 
be  published,  blank  forms  and  sample  ballots  must  be 
issued,  booths,  ofiicial  ballots,  poll  books  and  other  sta- 
tionery must  be  supplied,  and  primary  election  officers 
must  be  paid.^  The  method  by  which  this  expense  is 
met  depends  largely  upon  whether  the  primary  system  is 
optional  or  compulsory.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that 
where  mandatory  systems  are  established  the  expense  is 
public,  and  where  primaries  are  optional  the  expense  is 
borne  by  the  party  which  adopts  the  system. 

Where  the  party  pays  the  expense  the  law  may  provide 
how  this  is  to  be  done,  or  it  may  leave  the  matter  entirely 
with  the  party.     In  the  former  case  the  law  generally 

>  Aside  from  this  there  are  certain  more  or  less  private  and  personal  expenses 
borne  either  by  the  candidates  or  by  leading  party  spirits,  or  both,  arising  from 
the  pubUcation  of  partisan  pamphlets  and  other  campaign  material,  the  hiring 
of  speakers,  and,  in  general,  from  the  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  party  cam- 
paign. 


380  Argurne7it  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

regulates  expenditures  to  some  extent  by  fixing  the  sal- 
aries of  primary  election  officers,  and  by  providing  for 
the  proper  keeping  of  accounts ;  and  also  by  indicating 
how  the  necessary  funds  are  to  be  provided.  This  is  gen- 
erally done  through  the  assessment  of  candidates,  either 
for  a  fixed  fee,  for  a  graduated  sum,  or  for  a  certain  per 
cent,  of  the  salary  of  the  office  for  which  the  candidate 
runs.  Where  the  statute  leaves  the  matter  of  expense 
entirely  to  the  party  the  rules  may  fix  a  permanent  sum 
w^hich  is  the  same  for  all  offices,  or  is  graduated  accord- 
ing to  salary.  Where  annual  assessments  are  made  by 
the  pai'ty  committee,-^  the  sum  may  be  arbitrarily  fixed, 
or  it  may  be  a  certain  per  cent,  of  the  salary  of  the 
offices.  In  some  cases  provision  is  made  for  the  disposi- 
tion of  a  possible  surplus.  It  may  be  turned  intO'  the  gen- 
eral election  funds,  or  it  may  be  refunded  to  the  candi- 
dates, or  their  legal  representatives,^  or  turned  into  some 
special  fund,  such  as  the  school  fund.^ 

Where  the  expense  of  a  direct  primary  system  is  met 
out  of  the  public  funds  it  is  paid  for  by  the  political  di- 
vision in  which  the  system  operates.  If  used  only  in  a 
city,  the  city  treasury  supplies  the  money ;  if  in  a  county, 
the  county  treasury ;  if  in  a  State,  each  division  pays  out 
of  its  public  funds  those  expenses  which  are  entailed  to 
its  officers  in  carrying  out  +he  provisions  of  the  law,  the 
principle  being  the  same  as  in  case  of  general  elections. 
Where  primaries  are  a  public  expense,  uniform  or  grad- 
uated fees  may,  nevertheless,  be  required  from  candi- 


'  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  Indiana,  West  Virginia,  Missouri,  South  Carolina, 
Georgia,  Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  etc. 
=  Jlissouri  law,  1897. 
*  Missouri,  law  of  1891. 


Expense  of  Direct  Primaries.  381 

dates,  as  under  tlie  Minnesota,  Michigan,  Oregon,  and 
Missouri  laws  passed  in  1901.-^ 

Sometimes  wliero  a  law  is  compulsory,  and  a  public 
expense,  it  is  unpopular  at  the  outset  witL  the  country 
districts  where  politics  still  happens  to  be  pure,  because 
it  imposes,  what  seems  to  be,  unnecessary  taxation.  If  a 
compulsory  law  makes  the  primaries  a  party  expense,  as 
does  the  Indiana  law  of  1901,  the  danger  lies  in  the  op- 
pression of  all  minority  parties  whom  defeat  stares  in 
the  face,  and  which  will  have  considerable  difficulty  in 
getting  a  ticket  into  the  field,  because  candidates  will  be 
slow  in  coming  forward  in  a  minority  party,  and  pay 
heavy  assessments  only  to  be  defeated  at  the  polls.  Tha 
Indiana  law  applies  to  only  two  counties  in  which  tha 
Democratic  and  the  Republican  parties  are  quite  well 
balanced,  so  that  this  objection  loses  some  of  its  force. 
In  Randolph  county  of  that  State  such-  a  law  would  do 
a  high  injustice  to  the  Democratic  party  which  is  in  a 
hopeless  minority  there. 

Where  a  law  establishes  optional  primaries  at  the 
public  expense  it  may  happen  that  one  or  more  parties 
are  forced  to  pay  for  the  direct  primaries  of  another 
party  which  may  have  adopted  the  law.  If  optional  pri- 
maries at  the  party's  expense  are  provided  for,  conditions 
seem  fairly  well  met ;  but  the  difficulty  lies  in  forcing  the 
adoption  of  an  optional  law  in  cities  where  party  power 
is  lodged  in  the  hands  of  a  "machine"  which  would  be 
destroyed  were  mandatory  primaries  to  be  instituted. 
A  compromise  of  these  various  alternatives  might  be 

'  Direct  primary  bills  introduced  in  the  legislatures  of  Michigan,  Maryland,  and 
North  Dakota  provided  for  fees  equal  to  a  certain  percentage  of  the  salary  of 
the  oflfice. 


382  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

effected  by  throwing  proper  legal  safeguards  around  the 
indirect  primaries  of  the  country,  and  making  direct 
primaries  optional  there,  and  a  party  expense,  while  in 
the  cities  the  direct  primary  might  be  made  mandatory 
aaid  a  public  or  city  charge.  However,  since  direct 
nominations  have  been  found  so  generally  popular  in 
rural  districts,  and  also  for  the  sake  of  uniformity  and 
the  proper  operation  of  a  system,  it  is  desirable  to  have  a 
compulsory  law  making  the  primaries  a  public  expense. 
This  is  a  fair  way  of  doing,  because  it  taxes  everybody 
for  everybody's  own  good.  Almost  without  exception 
the  bills  introduced  into  the  legislatures  of  some  eight- 
een States  during  the  current  year  incorporated  the  prin- 
ciple of  mandatory  primaries  at  the  public  expense. 

The  assessment  of  candidates  possesses  a  strong  ele- 
ment of  injustice.  It  is  often  a  heavy  burden  as  imposed 
by  political  parties  without  limit  fixed  by  law.  In  Ken- 
tucky the  mayor  of  Louisville  was  assessed  $250  at  one 
time,  while  the  judge  of  the  circuit  court  and  the  con- 
gressman were  each  assessed  to  the  extent  of  $500.  The 
requirement  of  a  moderate  fee  to  insure  a  hona  fide  in- 
tention to  run  has  been  in  common  use,^  and  is  an  im- 
provement over  the  assessment  plan.  It,  however,  fre- 
quently fails  to  accomplish  its  purpose,  and  enables  the 
"scalawag"  to  buy  his  way  upon  the  nomination  ticket, 
only  to  be  bought  off  again  by  some  other  candidate  from 
whom  he  would  draw  most  votes.  It  has  the  advantage 
of  reducing  the  public  expense  of  the  primaries  to  some 
extent. 

Those  laws  which  require  no  fees  but  only  nomination 

'  Minnesota,  Missouri,  Michigan,  and  Oregon  under  the  Morgan  law,  are  ex- 
amples. 


Expense  of  Direct  Primaries.  383 

papers  properly  signed  by  a  certain  ^v  cent,  of  the 
voters  of  the  party  place  the  entire  expense  upon  the  tax- 
payer, and  give  the  opposition  an  opportunity  to  cry 
''expense."  We  are  getting  along  very  nicely  as  it  is, 
runs  the  argument,  and  our  convention  system  does  not 
cost  the  tax-payer  a  cent.  Neither  of  these  statements 
can  be  accepted.  The  first  has  already  been  shown  false, 
and  the  second  is  an  admission  of  ignorance  as  to  the 
workings  of  politics,  or  lacks  sincerity.  That  the  caucus 
and  convention  system  does  cost  somebody  large  sums  of 
money  cannot  be  denied.  To  keep  up  the  complex  or- 
ganization and  to  run  the  many  caucuses  and  conven- 
tions costs  much  money.  There  are  the  expenses  of  all 
delegates  to  be  paid  for  attending  the  conventions,  not 
to  mention  the  days  of  time  spent.  There  is  other  legiti- 
mate business  to  be  conducted  to  keep  the  huge  nomi- 
nating machinery  going.  There  are  "machine"  agents 
to  be  paid  and  delegates  to  be  bribed.  All  these  ex- 
penditures, whether  good  or  bad,  cause  heavy  drains 
upon  the  bank  accounts  of  some  people,  and  these  ac- 
counts must  be  replenished  from  some  source.  Charity 
hardly  enters  into  politics  in  that  fonn.  To  be  sure 
there  are  some  public-spirited  men  who  are  ready  to  give 
large  sums  to  help  defray  expenses  of  this  kind.  But  the 
men  out  of  whose  pockets  most  of  the  money  goes  are  in 
I^olitics  not  merely  to  give,  but  also  to  receive  in  such  a 
manner  that  there  will  be  "something  in  it." 

The  men  who  manipulate  corruptly  the  caucuses  and 
conventions  will  seek  recompense  somewhere.  Through 
some  channel  or  other  the  expense  will  eventually  fall 
upon  the  people,  either  through  unscrupulous  public 
officials  who  fill  the  purses  which  they  had  emptied  in. 


?tS4:  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

buying  their  nominations  from  tlie  "machine,"  or 
through  the  distribution  of  patronage,  or  by  recourse  to 
some  other  methods  in  which  the  politicians  are  versed. 
In  one  way  or  other  we  may  be  sure  that  the  people  are 
ultimately  made  to  pay  for  the  expense  of  our  caucuses 
and  conventions.  The  amount  thus  being  indirectly 
taken  out  of  the  tax-payer's  pocket,  v/e  may  also  feel 
assured,  is  likely  to  be  far  in  excess  of  what  the  outlay 
would  warrant.  The  politician  is  not  by  nature  severely 
economical,  and  all  the  expenses  of  his  living  must  be 
met  from  one  source  or  other. 

In  case  of  the  direct  primary,  whatever  expense  there 
may  be  is  fairly  contracted  in  the  interests  of  all,  and 
on  exactly  the  same  principles  as  in  case  of  our  general 
elections,  may  be  met  out  of  the  public  treasury.  The 
expense  of  a  direct  j^rimary  system  embracing  the  whole 
State  of  Wisconsin  would  be  surprisingly  small,  and  has 
been  estimated  at  $30,600,  itemized  as  follows:  Publi- 
cation of  notices  in  140  newspapers  at  $40  for  each 
paper  $5,600 ;  printing  1,000,000  official  ballots  $4,500  ; 
clerks  and  inspectors  in  1,300  country  precincts 
$13,000 ;  additional  inspectors  required  in  800  city  pre- 
cincts $7,500.^  This  estimate  was  based  upon  a  pro- 
posed system  of  concurrent  primaries.  Where  parties  do 
not  all  hold  their  primaries  on  the  same  day  and  place 
and  at  the  same  hours,  the  expense  is  considerably  more. 

The  expense  of  the  convention  system  of  the  same 
State  was  estimated  as  follows:  In  each  election  year 
there  are  held  at  least  6,000  caucuses,  300  assembly  and 
senatorial  conventions,  25  congressional  conventions,  250 

'  Address  of  H.  C.  Adams  before  Wisconsin  Committee  on  Privileges  and  Elec- 
tions (1901). 


Expense  of  Direct  Priraaries.  385 

county  conventionSj  and  3  state  conventions.  The  state 
conventions  are  attended  by  at  least  3,000  delegates  at 
a  minimum  expense  of  $25  each.  This  places  the  cost  o£ 
state  conventions  at  $75,000.  Assuming  that  the  cost 
of  attendance  to  delegates  to  the  remaining  575  conven- 
tions is  no  greater,  though  it  probably  is  twice  that 
amount,  then  the  cost  of  the  present  system  in  Wisconsin 
would  be  about  $150,000  in  an  election  year,  or  about 
five  times  the  estimated  expense  of  a  direct  primary  sys- 
tem. This  includes  no  estimate  of  money  "si)ent  on'* 
delegates  to  influence  their  action  in  conventions,  wliich 
sometimes  assumes  huge  proportions.^ 

The  small  cost  per  voter  of  the  primary  system  still 
further  brings  out  the  insignificance  of  the  expense  item. 
At  the  last  election  442,894  votes  were  east  in  Wisconsin. 
This  puts  the  cost  of  the  primaries  at  about  seven  cents 
per  voter.  In  return  for  this  small  outlay  he  is  enabled 
to  forego  the  necessity  of  attending  five  or  six  different 
caucuses  each  election  year,  and  of  spending  considerable 
time  at  each.  He  is  enabled  to  vote  for  each  and  every 
candidate  of  liis  choice,  all  in  the  space  of  a  few  brief 
moments.  All  this  for  seven  cents!  What  if  it  cost 
many,  many  times  that  sum  ?  The  citizen  in  a  re- 
public can  afford  to  pay  whatever  sum  is  necessary  to 
secure  equal  voice  in  making  the  laws,  for  this  means 
equal  taxation,  equal  privileges — good  government. 

He  who  objects  to  papng  this  meagre  sum  for  the 
sake  of  good  government  does  not  deserve  to  enjoy  its 

'  In  one  county  convention  held  to  send  delegates  to  a  senatorial  convention 
in  1900,  a  sura  of  money,  placed  at  seven  thousand  dollars  by  those  who  partici- 
pated in  the  contest,  is  said  to  have  been  spent  to  defeat  the  renomination  of  a 
senator  who  had  voted  to  Increase  railroad  taxation  in  the  preceding  session  of 
the  Wisconsin  legislature. 
25 


386  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

blessings.  lie  who  objects  to  a  direct  primary  law  upon 
the  ground  of  expense  declares  himself  willing  to  forego 
his  rights  as  a  voter,  and  his  duties  as  a  citizen,  for  the 
false  profit  of  a  few  paltry  cents.  He  who  sounds  the 
cry  of  an  oppressed  tax-payer  in  order  to  defeat  a  direct 
vote  system,  forgets  that  its  purpose  is  the  maintenance 
of  institutions  which  are  sacredly  enshrined  in  the  heart 
of  every  loyal  American,  and  which  were  bought  by  the 
blood  of  his  ancestors.  For  such  an  one  it  is  meet  to  re- 
member that  institutions  worth  dying  for  ought  also  to 
be  worth  paying  for. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

ARE  DIRECT  PRIMARIES  WORTHY  OF  A  TRIAL? 

Perliaps  the  reader  who  has  borne  with  the  author 
tnus  far  and  has  followed  the  discussion  patiently,  is 
not  quite  prepared  to  answer  affirmatively  to  the  ques- 
tion :  "Are  direct  primaries  worthy  of  a  thorough  trial  V* 
It  is  true  that  in  the  course  of  the  preceding  chapters 
many  suggestions  were  made  respecting  the  possibilities 
of  adverse  experiences  under  a  direct  vote  system,  even 
though  it  be  fairly  complete,  as  was  that  of  Hennepin 
•county,  Minnesota.  When  we  add  to  this,  partisan  news- 
paper discussions  and  hostile  magazine  articles,  as  well 
as  malicious  verbal  misrepresentations  and  concocted 
facts,  such  as  are  met  with  everywhere,  it  is  not  at  all 
surprising  that  the  thoughtful  and  conservative  man 
shrinks  from  committing  himself  in  favor  of  so  far- 
reaching  a  reform  as  that  of  the  direct  primary. 

A  little  reflection  along  general  lines  upon  what  has 
already  been  presented  in  the  more  or  less  devious  form 
of  particulars,  may  aid  in  the  formation  of  some  definite 
conclusion.  What  have  we  against  direct  primaries? 
Where  are  the  sources  of  adverse  experience?  As  we 
scan  the  field  of  practical  experimentation  in  quest  of 
untoward  facts,  the  eye  falls  upon  the  "Old  Crawford 
System"  and  its  successors  in  Pennsylvania;  it  rests 
upon  the  southern  plans  surrounded  by  troublesome  diffi- 
culties; it  fixes  its  gaze  upon  Cleveland,  Ohio, — that 
source  of  so  many  "objections"  to  direct  primaries;  thea 


388  Argument  of  the  Direct  Prhnary. 

it  wanders  about  tlirougli  West  Virginia,  Tennessee,  In- 
diana, Kentucky,  Kansas,  Nebraska,  and  Minnesota,  but 
in  vain  does  it  seek  for  unfavorable  results  of  a  real  and 
substantial  character.  Only  here  and  there  are  solitary 
instances  of  adverse  experience,  such  a5  one  might  ex- 
pect to  meet  under  any  system  in  the  first  stages  of  its  ap- 
plication. 

We  return  to  analyze  conditions  briefly  in  places 
from  which  some  adverse  criticism  may  be  quoted  by  op- 
ponents of  the  reform.  The  Crawford  county  system  of 
Pennsylvania  was  but  a  partial  success.  Why  ?  We  re- 
call that  this  State  has  no  direct  primary  law.  The  sys- 
tem was  entirely  extra-legal — a  mere  loose  bundle  of 
party  rules.  It  could  be  moulded  for  good  or  for  bad 
by  the  hands  of  the  party  authorities,  as  easily  as  could 
the  party-regulated  caucus  or  indirect  primary.  The 
trial  of  the  principle  in  Pennsylvania  was  largely  worth- 
less except  to  prove  the  necessity  of  a  complete,  statu- 
tory system. 

We  turn  to  the  South,  and  we  find  similar  systems, 
quite  as  extra-legal  in  character  as  that  in  Cra^vford 
county,  governed,  where  governed  at  all,  by  verbal  rules 
instead  of  written  statutes.  Parties  are  largely  unre- 
strained. Party  institutions  are  left  exposed  to  the  prej- 
udices, preferences,  and  s'^lfish  interests  of  corrupt  men. 
"Machine"  politics  is  permitted  under  the  cover  of  law 
to  monopolize  party  organizations,  and  to  control  the  pri- 
maries at  will.  Not  only  this,  but  political  conditions 
jjrevent  the  proper  and  necessary  struggle  between  rival 
parties  in  the  campaign.  The  Democratic  party  is  ever 
ascendant.  Once  in  power  always  in  power,  pictures 
the  situation  of  the  Democratic  party  in  the  South  owing 


Conclusion.  389 

to  conditions  which  are  everyT\'here  recognized  to-day  a3 
having  no  connection  with  primary  refonn.  Here  also 
then,  no  fair  trial  has  been  obtained.  No  results  wortliy 
of  much  weight  have  been  achieved. 

Cleveland,  Ohio,  is  claimed  as  an  instance  of  failure. 
The  opponent  of  reform  here  finds  an  assortment  of  con- 
venient facts.  He  presents  the  argument  of  a  corrupt 
press.  He  points  to  the  viciousness  of  deceptive  jour- 
nalism. He  pictures  a  medley  of  factional  politics,  of 
broken  party  organization,  of  weak  candidates,  and  of 
municipal  corruption.  His  claim  is  partially  true.  But 
while  it  sounds  well,  it  reasons  ill.  It  must  be  admitted 
that  the  direct  primary  has  not  been  generally  satisfac- 
tory in  Cleveland;  but  what  is  the  explanation  for  its 
shortcomings  ?  The  law  which  governs  the  system  is  op- 
tional and  very  imperfect.  It  leaves  many  of  the  most 
important  rules  to  be  prescribed  by  the  party.  Cleveland 
is  a  center  of  stormy  factional  politics.  There  is  no 
guarantee  against  the  invasion  of  parties.  No  proper 
registration  and  enrollment  system  is  employed.  And 
no  provision  is  made  for  the  selection  of  party  committee- 
men at  the  primary,  thereby  subjecting  party  organiza- 
tion to  factional  control,  and  exposing  the  entire  con- 
duct of  the  primary  to  the  bitter  discordance  of  party  dis- 
sensions and  factious  conflicts.  Yet,  in  spite  of  these 
grave  defects,  some  very  good  results  are,  in  many  cases, 
attained.  General  interest  is  aroused,  and  a  large  vote 
is  polled  even  though  the  primary  elections  are  not  held 
xm  registration  day.  The  voters  of  this  county  have 
never  been  induced  to  give  up  this  system,  imperfect 
as  their  law  is,  and  to  go  back  to  the  caucus  and  conven- 
tion plan  of  nomination. 


390  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

Our  conclusion  is,  therefore,  that  where  adverse  ex- 
periences are  encountered,  the  fault  does  not  seem  to  be 
to  any  material  extent  with  the  principle  of  direct  nomi- 
nation itself,  but  rather  with  the  imperfect  systems  in 
which  that  principle  is  incorporated,  and  under  which  it 
is  compelled  to  operate  at  a  disadvantage. 

What  can  be  said  where  favorable  results  are  met  ? 
We  turn  to  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Arkansas,  Indiana,  Iowa, 
Tennessee,  West  Virginia,  Maryland,  North  Dakota, 
South  Dakota,  etc.,  where  party  systems  are  employed, 
which  in  many  cases  are  entirely  free  of  legal  control, 
and  yet  afford  general  satisfaction,  and  strengthen  their 
hold  upon  the  people.  That  the  difficulties  which,  as  was 
seen,  frequently  sun*ound  party  systems  of  direct  pri- 
maries, do  not  demonstrate  themselves  to  any  disturb- 
ing extent  in  these  States,  is  due  largely  to  the  more  equi- 
table and  calm  political  conditions  which  prevail  there, 
and  to  the  nature  of  the  party  rules  under  which  the  sys- 
tems operate.  In  many  instances,  as  in  Kansas,  Ar- 
kansas, Indiana,  and  Tennessee,  the  periods  of  continu- 
ous trial  have  been  long  and  the  results  grow  ever  more 
favorable  with  each  succeeding  year. 

But  far  more  important,  and  by  far  more  convincing, 
are  the  results  which  were  attained  in  Kentucky  and 
Minnesota.  Here  the  poUtical  conditions  were  such  as 
invited  a  good  test.  The  optional  Kentucky  law,  while 
incomplete  and  not  lacking  in  defects,  is  good.  It  pro- 
vides an  excellent  system  of  enrollment  through  which 
interference  from  rival  parties  is  largely  prevented. 
Such  party  rules  as  are  necessary  to  supplement  the  law, 
are  in  the  main  strong  and  effective,  and  while  the  system 
is  not  entirely  satisfactory  it  is  declared  to  be  far  su- 


Conclusion.  391 

perior  to  tte  convention  plan.  Its  failings,  as  was 
pointed  out  in  the  discussion  of  this  State  in  Part  II, 
are  due  to  the  imperfections  of  the  law  of  1892  under 
which  the  system  is  still  operating. 

The  strongest  argument  in  support  of  direct  primaries 
may  be  drawn  from  Minnesota.  The  circumstances  of 
the  trial  were  almost  ideal  here.  The  more  important 
conditions  for  a  fair  test  were  all  present.  The  principle 
of  a  direct  vote  was  incorporated  in  a  complete  legal  sys- 
tem.^ The  parties  were  not  permitted  to  act  under  their 
own  rules,  but  were  compelled  to  conduct  their  primaries 
in  accordance  with  law.  The  county  in  which  the  trial 
was  made  was  populous  and  contained  a  large  city  as 
well  as  rural  population.  The  offices  for  which  nomina- 
tions were  made  ranged  from  tlie  highest  to  the  lowest, 
excepting  state  departments.  The  system  was  inaugu- 
rated in  one  of  the  worst  centers  of  "machine"  politics 
in  the  State.  Municipal  government  was  a  spoils  for 
boodle  aldermen.  Bitter  opponents,  who  misrepresented 
facts  and  distorted  results,  were  met  on  every  side.^ 
These  were  severe  conditions  for  a  trial,  but  success, 
should  it  come,  would  all  the  more  eloquently  prove  the 
strength  of  the  system.  And  success  did  come.  It  ex- 
ceeded the  expectations  of  many  of  the  most  enthusiastio 
reformers.  An  unsurpassed  vote  was  polled  at  the  pri- 
mary. Boodle  aldermen  were  dislodged,  and  "machine" 
rings  and  clubs  forced  to  disband.  Though  but  one  trial 
was  given  to  this  famous  Hennepin  county  law,  the  test 
seems  to  have  been  so  decisively  favorable  as  to  lead  to 

•  With  the  exception  of  provisions  for  the  maintenance  of  party  organization. 
'  The  grand  jury  fake,  for  example.    See  Milwaukee  Sentinel  June  1,  1901,  and 
the  Evening  Wisconsin  June  5,  6,  !901, 


392  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

the  enactment  of  the  present  law  embracing  the  entire 
State,  as  its  predecessor  had  embraced  one  county. 

The  story  of  the  Minnesota  direct  primaries  and  their 
triumphant  advance  reads  like  a  romance.  Facts  sup- 
port each  step  in  the  story,  and  it  is  their  merit  which 
sustains  the  tale.  It  is  true,  the  Minnesota  experience, 
as  every  other,  has  been  confined  to  the  limits  of  one 
county,  but  there  were  included  in  this  one  county,  nomi- 
nations for  membei's  of  congress,  for  both  houses  of  the 
legislature,  as  well  as  for  county  and  city  offices.  Some 
of  the  difficulties  of  a  platform^  of  party  organization, 
and  of  candidates  which  arise  when  the  principle  is  ap- 
plied beyond  the  bounds  of  one  county,  have  not  yet  been 
met.  Nothing  absolute  or  even  definite  can  be  said  re- 
specting a  comprehensive  system.  All  that  we  have  to 
go  by  is  experience  in  counties  and  cities,  and  there  the 
results  have  been  sufficiently  favorable  to  warrant  an  ex- 
tension of  the  plan  so  as  to  embrace  the  entire  State,  and 
include  legislative  offices,  or  even  the  heads  of  our  execu- 
tive departments.  Minnesota,  as  was  seen,  has  already 
adopted  the  system  for  all  legislative  offices,  and  its 
workings  will  be  watched  with  intense  interest  every- 
where. Why  a  plan  applied  to  all  officers  of  the  State 
should  fail  would  be  difficult  to  prove,  and  could  be  de- 
cided by  experiment  alone.  The  general  satisfaction 
given  by  direct  nominations  up  to  date,  certainly  argues 
for  their  success  on  a  still  broader  scale. 

We  are  often  reminded  that  even  though  nominations 
by  direct  vote  have  been  made  since  1868  their  general 
advisability  has  not  been  definitely  established.  True, 
we  arc  still  in  the  stage  of  experimentation,  but  it  is  a 
most  encouraging  and  a  most  progressive  one,  and  one 


Conclusion.  393 

which  bids  every  gcM>d  citizen  to  carry  forward  the  en- 
couraging work.  Since  its  first  trial  the  direct  primary 
has  been  extended  to  many  States,  as  was  seen,  and  has 
held  its  own  wherever  it  has  gone.  Not  one  instance  was 
discovered,  in  the  course  of  this  study,  where,  after  once 
being  fairly  established,  it  had  been  abandoned.  There 
is  no  reason  for  believing  that  the  direct  vote  system  is 
an  exception  to  the  general  rule  that  we  keep  what  is 
good  and  throw  away  what  is  bad.  Hence,  when  oppo- 
nents attempt  to  prove  upon  fair  grounds  of  past  experi- 
ence that  nominations  by  a  direct  vote  of  the  people  are 
impolitic,  they  are  quite  certain  to  find  an  impossible 
task  upon  their  hands. 

But,  says  the  friend  of  the  caucus  and  convention  sys- 
tem, where  the  people  nominate,  the  most  unrepresenta- 
tive men  may  get  into  office.  There  may  be  instances 
where  nine  men  run  for  an  office  and  the  winner  receives 
less  than  one-sixth  of  the  party  vote.  A  corporation  may 
dictate  nominations,  and  a  "machine"  may  place  its  can- 
didates in  office  in  a  race  of  bare  pluralities.  Deceptive 
journalism  may  distort  the  facts  and  defeat  a  good  man. 
There  may  be  a  complete  geographical  concentration  of 
candidates.  The  city  vote  may  dominate  the  country 
vote,  and  may  nominate  none  but  its  own  city  candidates. 
The  nationality  of  candidates  cannot  be  considered,  and 
a  complete  ticket  of  Irishmen  may  be  nominated  by  a 
German  electorate.  A  rich  and  incompetent  fellow  may 
defeat  a  poor  but  able  man.  A  county  clerk  may  win  ouo 
because,  as  real  estate  dealer,  his  name  is  knoAvn  to  the 
public,  and  has  been  staring  at  passers-by  from  many  a 
sign  in  many  a  lot  for  many  a  day.  All  this  may  happen, 
says  the  opponent,  and  yet  you  would  declare  direct  pri- 
maries a  success  and  worthy  of  further  trial ! 


39i  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  tliese  are  the  adverse  possi- 
bilities of  direct  primaries.  But  how  often  will  thej 
present  themselves  ?  In  the  preceding  discussion  of 
Part  III,  the  aim  has  been  to  point  out  their  probability^ 
and  that  is  the  basis  upon  which  the  weight  of  evidence  is 
favorable.  In  answer,  for  example,  to  the  contention 
that  there  will  be  more  pronounced  minority  representa- 
tions under  direct  primaries,  it  can  only  be  said  that  this 
may  sometimes  be  the  case,  but  that  where  valid  com- 
parisons have  in  any  way  been  possible,  the  general  ex- 
perience has  been  for  candidates  to  be  nominated  by  a 
much  larger  vote  than  under  the  present  system,  so  large 
in  fact,  that,  in  many  cases,  it  has  reached  a  majority. 

It  must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  unfavorable 
possibilities  which  were  enumerated  in  the  preceding 
chapters  are  by  no  means  all  possible  under  every  sys- 
tem, in  every  State,  or  county,  at  every  primary  election. 
They  comprise  rather  a  collection  of  all  the  unpropi- 
tious  features,  as  gathered  from  experience  with  a  coimt- 
less  variety  of  direct  primary  systems,  operating  under 
widely  different  political,  social,  and  economical  condi- 
tions of  life.  Just  what  difficulties  may  be  encountered 
in  each  particular  case  where  a  new  system  is  tried  is 
beyond  prediction,  except  in  a  general  way,  but  it  is  safe 
to  say,  that,  under  any  ordinary  circumstances,  but  a 
comparatively  small  number  of  the  objectionable  results 
which  have  been  enumerated  can  possibly  manifest  them- 
selves at  any  one  time. 

When  the  opponent  of  reform  in  eloquent  words  piles 
up  argument  upon  argument  in  a  towering  mass,  it 
seems  as  though  direct  primaries  must  be  a  hopeless  fail- 
ure.   He,  however,  gathers  his  unfavorable  evidence,  as 


Conclusion.  395 

already  indicated,  from  many  localities,  scattered  over 
a  wide  field  of  experience,  and  skilfully  builds  it  into  a 
monstrous  and  apparently  crushing  opposition.  If  these- 
adverse  conditions  and  unfavorable  forces^  as  the  oppo- 
nent pictures  them,  could,  under  any  conceivable  circum- 
stances, be  made  to  operate  at  once  in  any  particular 
locality,  they  would  undoubtedly  bring  destruction  to 
any  direct  vote  system  that  the  ingenuity  of  man  can  de- 
vise; but  we  are  not  dealing  Avith  an  imaginaiy  situation. 
The  problem  is  an.  eminently  practical  one,  concerned 
alone  with  natural  and  ordinary  conditions  of  life. 

For  the  purpose  of  illustrating  this  unfair  method  of 
opposition,  the  direct  primary  may,  in  imagination,  be 
likened  to  the  mountain  climber,  who  as  he  scours  the 
sides  of  cliffs  finds  streams  obstructing  his  path.  One 
by  one  he  successfully  fords  each  in  its  turn,  and  takes 
from  each  a  drink  of  life.  Far  down  at  the  foot  of  the 
mountain  these  same  streams  are  gathered  in  a  mighty 
reservoir  built  by  the  hand  of  man,  and  the  accumulated 
waters  flood  the  valley  as  a  sea.  Here  a  crossing  would 
bring  death,  and  were  the  huge  volume  of  water  to  be 
liberated  all  at  once  destruction  would  speed  away  all 
of  life  in  its  path.  Wherever  the  primary  goes  it  like- 
wise finds  obstacles  in  its  way,  which,  however,  do  not 
defeat  its  purpose,  but  point  out  the  necessity  of  im- 
provement, and  through  discovered  weakness  add  more 
strength.  But  were  it  to  be  put  in  operation  where  the 
hand  of  the  opponent  has  constructed  artificial  condi- 
tions of  life  out  of  all  tlie  sources  of  adverse  experience 
that  could  possibly  be  accumulated,  the  case  would  be 
hopeless   and  sunk  in  miserable  failures. 

The  progress  of  the  direct  primary  ought  not  to  be 


396  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primnary. 

stopped  as  looig  as  it  brings  us  something  better  than 
what  we  now  enjoy.  Its  course  ought  not  to  bo  strewn 
•with  stumbling  blocks  as  long  as  it  successfully  over- 
comes the  difficulties  which  beset  its  onward  path.  ITor 
ought  we  to  lend  a  hand  of  prejudice  in  an  over-enthusi- 
astic attempt  to  pave  its  way.  Justice  and  reason  de- 
mand of  all  a  plain  duty,  to  step  aside  and  let  it  come ; 
to  let  it  work  its  way  unhampered ;  to  give  it  a  fair  trial. 
The  author  shares  with  his  readers  in  an  aversion  to 
new-fangled  innovations  and  to  unreasoned  and  mis- 
chievous experimentation  in  political  institutions,  and  is 
ready,  at  all  times,  to  encourage  a  proper  conservatism, 
but  he  is  as  decidedly  opposed  to  that  false  and  indefen- 
sible disposition  to  maintain  existing  institutions  upon 
largely  unreasonable  and  sentimental  grounds  in  the  face 
of  successful  experience  which  goes  to  demonstrate  the 
practicability  and  the  wisdom  of  a  change,  and  which  has 
in  store  the  promise  of  much  good. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  ESSENTIAL  FEATURES  OF  A  GOOD  DIRECT 
PRIMARY  LAW. 

In  order  that  the  principle  of  direct  nomination  may 
be  put  to  a  fair  test  it  is  necessary  not  only  to  permit  it 
to  be  placed  on  trial  in  one  form  or  another,  but  it  must 
be  incorporated  in  the  best  statutory  system  that  can  be 
devised  upon  the  basis  of  past  experience.  There  will  bo 
presented  in  this  chapter  what  the  writer  believes  to  in- 
clude the  essential  features  of  such  a  system.  It  may  be 
well  in  this  connection  to  recall  the  suggestions  made  in 
an  earlier  chapter  to  the  effect  that  political  conditions, 
constitutional  provisions,  Australian  ballot  laws,  and 
ideals  and  customs  of  party  action,  vary  widely  in  the 
different  States,  and  make  a  imiform  system  impossible, 
so  that  the  scheme  which  will  be  explained  here  in  its 
larger  outlines  must  not  be  looked  upon  as  a  special  pre- 
scription for  primary  evils  in  each  and  every  State,  but 
rather  as  a  practical  model  which  may  serve  as  a  guide 
to  the  direct  primary  legislator,  and  may  furnish  a  work- 
ing basis  for  the  construction  of  a  particular  direct  vote 
system. 

In  order  that  a  law  may  be  complete,  and  may  receive 
a  decisive  and  conclusive  trial,  it  must  embrace  the  en- 
tire State.  This  is  necessary  because  our  whole  political 
organization  centers  about  the  central  or  state  govern- 
ment In  state  politics  local  politics  works  itself  out. 
The  state  convention  caps  our  commonwealth  nominat- 
ing machinery.     All  political  activity,  all  political  or- 


398  Argument  of  the  Direct  Frimary. 

ganlzation,  all  ix>lit.ical  institutions  within  the  State 
converge  to  this  common  head,  which  introduces  unity 
and  a  controlling  purpose  into  the  whole  system.  Tha 
great  political  leaders  do  not  move  in  the  localities. 
Their  field  is  the  State.  Political  combiaations  reach 
out  largely  from  a  central  stronghold,  and  spread  their 
influence  not  only  over  one  county  or  one  district,  but 
•over  the  entire  State.  Hence,  to  institute  a  direct  pri- 
mary system,  applying  to  but  one  county,  or  to  none  but 
county  and  city  officers  in  all  the  counties  of  the  State, 
is  to  apply  but  a  partial  remedy,  which  while  it  would 
undoubtedly  yield  better  results  than  are  attained  under" 
the  convention  system,  would,  nevertheless,  leave  the  re- 
form imperfect  and  incomplete.  The  abuses  in  our  state 
governments  would  remain, — a  menace  not  only  to  the 
cause  of  good  government,  but  also  to  the  successful 
operation  of  the  local  systems. 

It  is  because  of  the  comparatively  unimportant  re- 
form effected  by  local  systems  that  "machine"  politicians 
-are  willing  partially  to  satisfy  public  clamor  by  allowing 
a  compromise  county  or  city  scheme  to  be  inaugurated, 
as  was  the  case  in  Minnesota  in  1899,  and  in  Oregon  and 
Michigan  in  1901.  But  such  systems  operate  at  a  great 
disadvantage  because  "machine"  and  corporation  agents 
will  strain  every  nerve  to  discredit  the  principle  upon. 
Avhich  they  are  based  and  thus  to  prevent  their  extension 
to  the  entire  State,  where  they  would  strike  a  vital  blow 
at  the  corrupt  powers  which  ever  besiege  our  legislative 
halls  and  worm  their  way  into  the  administrative  de- 
partments in  our  Commonwealths.  A  local  system 
would  therefore  at  best  be  but  an  imperfect  reform,  and 
Tv^ould  run  the  risk  of  being  misrepresented,  shrewdly 


A   Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  399 

discredited,  or  even  defeated  entirely  by  being  embodied 
in  imperfect  legislation  through  the  scheming  opposition 
of  professional  politicians. 

Fall  primary  elections  ought  to  be  held  at  a  suffi- 
-ciently  long  time  before  the  general  election  to  permit 
the  various  parties  properly  to  prosecute  their  cam- 
paigns, and  to  enable  the  voter  to  become  thoroughly 
familiar  with  the  relative  merits  of  candidates  of  the 
different  parties  nominated  at  the  primaries.  Sixty 
days  seems  to  be  generally  suggested  as  the  proper  in- 
terim. In  case  of  spring  elections  which  cover  but  a 
narrow  local  area,  and  are  confined  to  smaller  and  denser 
groups  of  population,  the  public  is  able  to  become  ac- 
quainted with  the  qualifications  of  the  candidates  in  a 
briefer  space  of  time  so  that  two  or  three  weeks  would 
probably  be  a  sufficiently  long  interval. 

No  party  ought  to  be  permitted  to  participate  in  the 
primary  election  which  has  only  a  local  following,  or 
which  is  composed  of  a  few  fanatics,  or  radicals,  and 
their  immediate  friends.  Nor  ought  any  party  to  be  ex- 
cluded which  champions  a  reasonable  and  dignified 
cause,  and  which  has  given  evidence  of  a  fairly  wide- 
spread membership.  The  exclusion  of  weak  local  parties 
is  justifiable  on  the  ground  of  the  expense  which  their 
participation  would  involve,  and  also  because  the  num- 
erous party  tickets  and  the  many  lists  of  candidate3 
would  tend  to  confuse  the  voter  and  scatter  his  attention 
for  useless  reasons.  Just  what  percentage  of  the  total 
vote  cast  at  the  last  election  ought  to  be  represented  by  a 
party  in  order  to  entitle  it  to  a  place  upon  the  primary 
election  ballot  must  necessarily  vary  "with  the  peculiar 
political  conditions  of  each  State,  and  in  actual  experi- 


400  Alignment  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

ence  has  ranged  from  one  to  ten  or  fifteen  per  cent.,  al- 
though the  more  common  practice  fixes  it  at  from  three 
to  five  per  cent.  No  party  ought  to  be  excluded  which 
may  reasonably  be  expected  to  be  a  deciding  factor  in  de- 
termining the  result. 

It  is  desirable  to  have  all  parties  participate  in  the 
primary  election  on  the  same  day  at  the  same  time  and 
place.  Concurrent  primaries  greatly  reduce  the  expense 
to  the  State  where  it  is  met  out  of  the  public  treasury ; 
permit  of  the  use  of  the  open  primaiy  system  of  voting 
upon  the  Australian  ballot  plan;  and  considerably 
lessen  the  difficulties  of  their  proper  management. 

The  notices  of  primary  elections  must  be  published 
long  enough  in  advance  to  enable  candidates  to  secure  the 
required  number  of  signatures  for  their  nomination  pa- 
pers, and  to  file  these  papers  in  due  season  for  the  proper 
publication  of  the  lists  of  candidates,  and  for  the  printing 
and  distribution  of  sample  and  official  ballots.  But  the 
notices  ought  not  to  be  given  out  so  early  as  to  permit 
the  people  to  forget  all  about  the  primary  elections  be- 
fore they  are  held.     A  tw^o  months'  notice  is  suggested. 

It  is  obvious  that  a  primary  election  law  must  not 
permit  any  and  every  person  who  has  aspirations  to  pub- 
lic honors  to  run  for  a  nomination  unless  he  can  furnish 
well-founded  evidence  of  a  desire  on  the  part  of  a  rea- 
sonable proportion  of  the  people  to  nominate  him.  If 
evei*ybody  were  free  to  try  for  a  nomination,  primary 
election  ballots  would  be  unwieldy  in  size  and  expensive 
in  preparation ;  the  voter  would  be  confused  with  a  long 
list  of  names ;  and  votes  would  be  scattered  among  many 
candidates,  thereby  giving  rise  to  pronounced  minority 
nominations  which  would  enable  "machines"  and  cor- 


A  Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  401 

porations  to  dictate  in  the  selection  of  candidates  with 
great  facility,  through  the  concentration  of  their  vote 
upon  one  man. 

Moreover,  politicians  ought  to  be  prevented,  as  far  as 
possible,  from  putting  up  "straw"  or  bogus  candidates 
for  the  diversion  of  the  vote,  and  only  those  men  who 
have  a  bona  fide  intention  of  running  for  office  should  be 
permitted  to  have  their  names  printed  upon  the  primaiy 
election  ballot.  The  determining  principle  must  be  to 
confine  the  vote  at  the  primary  election  to  those  candi- 
dates who  possess  merit,  and  who  are  supported  by  a 
sufficient  number  of  the  voters  to  entitle  them  to  a  recog- 
nition upon  the  ballot  tlirough  their  anticipated  influence 
in  deciding  the  result  at  the  polls. 

These  objects  can  probably  best  be  accomplished  by 
requiring  the  filing  of  petitions  or  nomination  papers 
signed  by  from  two  to  three  per  cent,  of  all  the  members 
of  the  political  organization  named  in  the  petition  and 
represented  in  the  political  division  covered  by  the  office 
for  which  a  nomination  is  sought.  To  insure  that  the 
signatures  may  represent  the  latest  possible  expression 
of  the  wishes  of  the  signers  with  respect  to  the  candi- 
dates, the  circulation  of  nomination  papers  prior  to  the 
publication  of  the  notices  of  a  primary  election  ought 
to  be  forbidden. 

In  order  to  prevent  "home  candidates,"  or  men  who 
have  supporters  only  in  a  narrow  community,  from  secur- 
ing the  required  number  of  signatures,  it  is  necessary  to 
provide  for  the  proper  distribution  of  the  signers  over 
the  territory  comprising  the  district.  In  case  of  state 
offices  provision  might  be  made  that  signers  of  nomina- 
tion papers  ought  to  reside  in  at  least  one-half  of  the 
26 


402  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

counties  of  tlie  State,  and  in  number  bear  the  same  ratio 
to  the  whole  number  of  signatures  required,  as  tbe  num- 
ber of  votes  cast  by  the  party  in  each  county  bears  to  the 
whole  number  of  votes  cast  within  all  the  counties  in 
which  signatures  are  solicited.* 

In  case  of  the  district  offices  the  same  principle 
might  be  applied,  except  that  since  we  are  dealing  with 
much  smaller  political  divisions,  embracing  but  a  few, 
or,  at  times,  but  one  county,  there  might  result  a  bunch- 
ing of  signatures  without  the  insertion  of  a  provision 
that  signers  must  reside  in  at  least  one-fourth  or  one- 
third  of  the  election  precincts  in  at  least  one-half  of  the 
counties  included  in  the  district.  For  the  same  reasons, 
signers  of  nomination  papers  for  county  or  city  offices 
ought  to  be  residents  in  at  least  one-half  of  the  election 
precincts  witliin  the  county  or  city. 

For  the  purpose  of  identifying  the  signers,  and  for 
the  prevention  of  fraudulent  or  indiscriminate  signing, 
there  should  appear  in  case  of  each  signature,  the  name 
in  full,  residence,  street,  and  number  (if  any),  profes- 
sion, and  a  declaration  that  the  signer  intends  to  support 
the  candidate. 

In  order  that  the  signatures  may  faithfully  represent 
the  standing  of  a  candidate  among  the  body  of  voters 
who  alone  decide  his  nomination,  no  person  who  is  dis- 
qualified from  voting  under  the  laws  of  the  State  ought 
to  be  permitted  to  sign.  Nor  ought  any  qualified  voter 
to  be  allowed  to  sign  more  than  one  nomination  paper 
for  any  given  office. 

To  facilitate  matters  in  the  process  of  identification  of 
signers,  and  to  aid  in  the  detection  and  investigation  of 
fraudulent  signatures,  as  well  as  for  the  convenience  of 

>  See  p.  %M. 


A   Good  Direct  Primary  Laio.  403 

those  voters  who  may  be  called  upon  to  testify  to  the 
genuineness  of  signatures,  it  is  well  to  keep  signatures 
distinct  by  precincts  in  case  of  nomination  papers  for 
all  oflSces. 

In  order  to  prevent  the  future  embarracsment  of  can- 
didates who  have  filed  nomination  papers  containing 
illegal  sig-natures,  and  for  their  immediate  protection, 
some  qualified  elector  in  each  community  ought  to  be 
called  upon  to  affix  his  affidavit  to  a  group  of  signatures 
known  to  him  certifying  to  its  correctness. 

Provision  might  well  be  made  for  the  filing  of  nomi- 
nation papers  for  non-partisan  or  independent  candi- 
dates. The  number  of  signatures  required  in  such  cases 
ought  to  be  greater  than  in  case  of  regular  party  nomi- 
nation papers  in  order  to  prevent  visionaries,  fanatics, 
and  men  who  have  none  but  upstart  ideas  to  advertise, 
and  no  meritorious  cause  to  champion,  from  securing  a 
place  on  the  primary  election  ballot,  and  to  discourage 
independent  attempts  at  nomination  when  unsupported 
by  worthy  and  popular  principles  endorsed  by  a  reason- 
able proportion  of  the  voting  population. 

These  nomination  papers  ought  to  be  filed  at  such  a 
time  as  to  permit  of  the  proper  publication  of  the  lists 
of  candidates,  and  the  preparation  of  sample  and  official 
ballots,  as  well  as  to  enable  the  public  to  inform  itself 
respecting  the  relative  merits  of  the  candidates,  without 
dragging  out  the  nominating  campaigns  to  such  an  ex- 
tent as  to  result  in  a  loss  of  interest.  Thirty  days  would 
probably  be  ample  for  the  accomplishment  of  these  pur- 
poses. 

For  the  sake  of  convenience  and  system  the  nomina- 
tion papers  pertaining  to  the  coimty  and  city  officers  may 


404  Arcjument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

well  be  filed  with  the  county  and  city  clerks  respectively, 
and  all  others  with  the  secretary  of  state.  This  ar- 
rangement necessitates  the  forwarding  of  the  names  of 
candidates  filed  with  the  secretary  of  state  to  the  vari- 
ous county  clerks  in  Avhose  counties  the  candidates  are 
to  be  voted  for.  Sufficient  time  must  be  allowed  for  the 
arrangeinent  of  the  names  of  candidates  filed  with  the 
secretary  of  state,  for  their  transcription,  and  the  dupli- 
cation of  the  lists,  preparatory  to  their  transmittal  to 
the  proper  county  clerks.  About  five  days  would  seem  to 
be  a  reasonable  time,  so  that  the  county  clerks  would  re- 
ceive the  lists  about  twenty-five  days  before  the  primary 
election. 

Immediately  after  the  receipt  of  the  lists  of  candi- 
dates, the  county  clerks  ought  to  be  required  to  prepare 
and  publish  sample  ballots,  as  well  as  to  advertise  the 
lists  from  time  to  time  in  some  newspapers  of  general 
circulation. 

In  case  of  city  primary  elections,  where  the  facilities 
for  the  familiarization  of  the  voters  with  the  candi- 
dates are  many,  and  the  area  covered  by  the  election  is 
small,  it  would  not  be  necessary  to  close  the  filing  of 
nomination  papers  until  about  two  weeks  before  the  pri- 
mary, nor  to  compel  the  publication  of  the  lists  of  candi- 
dates earlier  than  the  ten^^h  day  preceding  primary  day. 

All  necessary  ballots,  blanks,  and  other  supplies  can 
probably  be  most  conveniently  furnished,  as  in  the  case 
of  general  elections,  while  the  necessary  expense  in- 
volved may  be  met  out  of  the  city,  county,  or  state  funds- 
as  provided  by  the  general  election  laws.^ 

>  See  p.  382  on  how  the  expense  may  be  met. 


A  Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  405 

It  is  desirable  to  surround  the  officers  who  conduct  tbe 
primary  elections  with  all  the  powers  and  all  the  dignity 
and  influence  which  is  enjoyed  by  those  acting  at  general 
elections.  This  can  be  accomplished  by  placing  the  pri- 
maries under  the  supervision  of  the  same  officers  who 
conduct  the  general  elections,  and  by  providing  for  the 
choice  of  all  inspectors,  ballot  clerks,  etc,  as  in  the  case 
of  general  elections. 

What  is  known  as  the  open  primary  system  of  voting 
is  suggested  as  a  first  choice.^  Under  this  system  due 
r^stration,  or  qualification  to  vote  under  the  general 
©lection  laws,  is  made  the  only  requirement  for  partici- 
pation in  the  primary.  The  tickets  of  all  parties,  as  well 
as  a  non-partisan  ticket,  are  securely  fastened  together^ 
and  handed  to  the  voter  with  the  right  of  voting  any  one 
of  them.  If  several  tickets  are  marked  none  is  to  b© 
counted.^  But  a  voter  may  write  the  name  of  any  can- 
didate running  on  some  other  ticket,  or  any  other  person, 
upon  the  ticket  of  his  choice,  and  such  vote  is  to  count 
towards  a  nomination  of  the  selected  person  upon  the 
ticket  upon  which  the  name  is  written.^ 

It  seems  desirable  to  prevent  the  use  of  pasters,  by 
denying  the  voter  the  right  to  paste  a  slip  containing  a 
written  or  printed  name  upon  the  ballot.  This  privi- 
lege is  granted  under  the  Oregon  and  California  laws, 
but  is  open  to  serious  objections.  In  New  York  it  was 
found  to  be  extremely  inconvenient  and  annoying  in  the 

'  For  detailed  reasons,  see  Part  m,  ch.  IX 

*  Were  it  not  for  the  unwieldy  size  of  the  ballot,  and  the  difficulty  of  its  prep- 
aration, it  would  be  desirable  to  have  all  tickets  on  one  sheet  to  avoid  possible 
separations  and  losses. 

'  This  is  to  discoiu-age  even  an  attempt  to  have  votes  counted  on  several  tickets. 

*  This  provision,  by  permitting  every  voter  to  cast  his  ballot  for  any  person  of 
his  choice,  overcomes  the  constitutional  difficulty  of  a  free  exercise  of  the  right 
of  suffrage. 


406  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

canvass  through  the  pasting  together  and  tearing  of  bal- 
lots, while  it  also  encouraged  electioneering  by  "ma- 
chine" men  who  were  on  hand  with  neatly  printed  and 
easily  pasted  slips  containing  the  names  of  their  favor- 
ites, which  they  distributed  among  the  voters  with  great 
success. 

In  the  arrangement  of  the  printed  matter  upon  the 
ballots,  the  following  order  is  suggested:  Eirst,  the 
names  of  the  various  candidates  grouped  alphabetically  ^ 
by  parties  and  under  the  proper  offices  in  the  order  of 
their  importance,  beginning  with  the  highest,  or  state 
offices.  Next,  the  delegates  to  conventions,  if  any,  and 
the  party  committeemen. ^  And  finally,  the  proposi- 
tions of  party  policy  or  principle  or  rules  of  party  or- 
ganization, if  any. 

Should  it  be  found  desirable  to  incorporate  the  closed 
primary  system,  then  the  New  York  secret  enrollment 
plan  as  explained  in  Part  II  is  worthy  of  further  trial.'^ 
The  test  oath  which  may  be  requirenl  in  case  of  a  chal- 
lenge, or  preparatory  to  enrollment,  ought  not  to  con- 
cern itself  with  the  past  affiliations  of  the  voter,  nor 
ought  it  to  bind  his  future  action,  but  should  be  confined 
solely  to  a  declaration  of  general  sympathy  with  the 
principles  of  the  party,  and  of  a  present  intention  to  sup- 
port generally  the  candidates  of  the  party  at  the  ensuing 
election.^    It  would  seem  advisable  to  have  the  test  pre- 

1  The  alteration  of  the  names  by  which  every  candidate  is  given  the  advantage 
of  a  first  position,  is  also  desirable,  bnt  it  increases  the  expense  because  of  the 
greater  amount  of  work  involved  in  the  printing,  sorting,  etc. 

a  Whether  or  no.  the  voter  ought  to  be  allowed  to  write  the  names  of  the  com- 
nutteemen  of  his  choice  in  spaces  provided  for  this  purpose,  or  whether  such 
names  ought  to  be  formally  proposed  and  printed  upon  the  ballot,  is  still  an  open 
question.    The  tendency  at  present  is  to  leave  blank  spaces. 

»  See  p.  112. 

«  See  p.  370,  also  350. 


A  Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  407 

scribed  by  the  legislature,  instead  of  leaving  it  to  tlic 
party  authorities.^ 

Each  party  must  necessarily  have  its  own  ballot  under 
the  closed  primary  system,  and  may  also  be  given  its  own 
ballot  box,  thereby  facilitating  the  canvass  by  removing 
the  necessity  of  first  sorting  the  ballots  by  parties,  and 
thus  eliminating  the  possibility  of  mistakes  in  the  pro- 
cess of  assortment.  If  only  one  ballot  box  is  used  it  is 
desirable  to  have  the  various  tickets  of  different  color? 
to  aid  in  their  assortment;  otherwise  the  same  color, 
size,  and  arrangement  is  suggested. 

To  repress  suspicions  of  foul  play  and  to  insure  fair- 
ness in  the  conduct  of  the  primary  election,  party  chal- 
lengers ought  to  be  permitted  to  be  present  at  the  polls, 
and  to  observe  the  acts  of  the  primary  officers,  while  in- 
dividual candidates  in  case  of  important  offices,  or  speci- 
fied groups  for  minor  positions,  might  well  be  given  the 
right  to  hire  watchers  of  their  own.^ 

The  polls  ought  to  be  open  for  a  sufficiently  long  time 
to  enable  every  class  of  voter,  from  the  pauper  and 
laborer  to  the  banker  and  society  leader,  to  cast  his  bal- 
lot without  unreasonable  inconvenience.  In  the  city, 
where  the  working  day  generally  begins  at  about  seven 
o'clock  and  ends  at  six  o'clock,  the  laborer  ought  to  have 
at  least  two  opportunities  for  voting,  one  in  the  morn- 
ing and  another  in  the  evening ;  hence,  the  polls  ought  to 
be  open  from  about  six  o'clock  in  the  morning  to  nine 
o'clock  in  the  evening.  In  the  country  the  most  con- 
venient hours  frequently  are  in  the  morning  on  the  re- 
turn of  the  farmer  from  the  creamery,  mill,  or  store, 
and  in  the  evening  after  the  day's  work  is  done.     The 

» See  pp.  343-347.  »  See  p.  173. 


408  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

tendency  has  been  to  make  tlie  hours  of  open  polls 
shorter  for  the  country  than  for  the  city,  but  in  view  of 
the  longer  trips  to  the  polls,  and  the  greater  inconven- 
ience incident  to  voting  in  rural  districts,  it  seems  very 
desirable  to  give  the  farmer  the  advantage  of  a  long  day 
ranging  from  about  seven  o'clock  in  the  morning  to  nine 
o'clock  in  the  evening. 

Where  the  open  primary  system  is  employed  the 
votes  must  necessarily  be  canvassed  by  representatives 
of  all  parties  to  insure  a  fair  and  impartial  count.  The 
following  canvassing  boards  are  suggested:  A  county 
canvassing  board  composed  of  the  county  clerk  and  the 
chairman  and  secretaries  of  the  county  committee  of 
each  political  party  within  such  county.  A  city  can- 
vassing board  composed  of  the  city  clerk  and  corre- 
sponding party  oflficers  within  the  city.  A  state  canvass- 
ing board  composed  of  the  secretary  of  state  and  the 
chairman  and  secretary  of  the  state  central  committee 
of  each  political  party.  Definite  dates  must  be  fixed  for 
the  opening  and  closing  of  the  canvass  in  order  to  avoid 
unreasonable  delays. 

Where  the  closed  primary  system  is  incorporated  in 
the  law  each  party  is  enabled  to  canvass  its  own  vote, 
since  the  ballots  of  the  different  parties  are  separate. 
In  this  case  the  ward,  city,  and  coimty  canvassing  boards 
may  well  be  composed  of  the  party  chairmen  of  the  elec- 
tion precincts  within  these  political  divisions.  The  state 
canvassing  board  may  be  composed  of  the  party  chair- 
men of  each  county. 

Those  persons  who  receive  the  largest  number  of  votes 
are  to  be  the  nominees.^    Tie  votes  can  probably  best  be 

'  See  p.  200,  for  discussion  of  majority  nominations. 


A  Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  409 

decided  by  the  canvassers  by  lot.  Except  in  case  of  local 
offices,  it  would  be  inconvenient  and  expensive  for  can- 
didates to  meet  and  decide  the  tie. 

The  party  platform  must  faithfully  reflect  the  wishes 
of  the  voters,  and  must  be  drawn  from  such  a  source  as 
to  possess  a  controlling  influence  over  the  candidates. 
The  following  method  for  its  promulgation  is  suggested : 
Apply  the  referendum  principle  to  its  adoption  by  vest- 
ing with  the  people  the  power  of  a  veto  over  the  main 
issues  of  a  platform  which  is  to  be  drawn  by  the  state 
central  committee  of  the  party,  somewhat  upon  the  plan 
by  which  propositions  of  party  policy  or  principle  are 
submitted  to  a  vote  at  the  primary  under  the  Oregon  law 
of  the  year  1901.  In  order  to  further  clothe  the  voter 
with  the  consciousness  of  power,  the  right  of  having  any 
particular  detail  submitted  upon  petition  of  a  certain 
number  of  voters  might  be  incorporated.^ 

Although  the  direct  primary  by  abolishing  the  con- 
vention will  considerably  curtail  the  large  powers  which 
are  at  present  exercised  by  party  committees  over  the  or- 
ganization and  conduct  of  these  bodies,  and  will  transfer 
much  of  the  importance  and  significance  of  party  ac- 
tivity from  the  party  officers  to  the  party  members,  there 
will,  nevertheless,  devolve  upon  the  party  committees  a 
number  of  important  duties  which  they  alone  can  well 
execute,  and  which  will  invariably  have  a  great  in- 
fluence over  the  failure  or  success  of  the  individual  party 
candidates.  The  party  committees  will  still  have  to  out- 
line the  campaigns,  hire  campaign  speakers,  arrange 
their  tours  in  accordance  with  the  particular  needs  of 

'  See  p.  272.  The  plan  of  having  the  platform  drawn  by  the  candidates  after 
their  nomination,  while  a  most  radical  departure  from  the  present  method,  might 
prove  far  more  successful  than  its  novelty  and  apparent  Inconsistency  with  es- 
tablished customs  would  suggest.    See  p.  269. 


410  Argument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

the  various  candidates,  distribute  campaign  documents, 
arrange  for  meetings,  etc.  These  committees,  therefore, 
will  still  possess  powers  of  sufficient  importance  to  cre- 
ate the  temptation  of  their  arbitrary  control  by  politi- 
cians for  the  promotion  of  private  and  personal  interests, 
thereby  distorting  the  proper  operation  of  the  direct 
vote  system  and  thwarting  the  wishes  of  the  people.  For 
this  reason  the  writer  very  seriously  urges  the  populari- 
zation of  that  important  and  indispensable  part  of  our 
nominating  machinery,  the  party  organization,  through 
the  selection  of  the  party  committeemen  by  the  voters  at 
the  primary,  rather  than  by  delegates  at  conventions,  or 
by  appointment  from  some  source,  in  which  cases  they 
would  be  in  constant  danger  of  falling  a  prey  to  the 
ever-present  influences  of  corrupt  politics. 

The  process  of  their  selection  might  be  made  exceed- 
ingly simple.  A  party  committee  of  three  for  each  elec- 
tion precinct  might  easily  be  chosen  by  permitting  every 
voter  to  write  the  names  of  any  three  qualified  electors 
residents  of  the  precinct  in  spaces  left  on  the  ticket  for 
that  purpose.  The  three  receiving  the  largest  number 
of  votes  are  to  constitute  the  precinct  committee,  the 
one  having  received  the  highest  vote  to  be  chairman. 
The  party  committee  of  each  city,  county,  and  assembly 
district  may  be  composed  of  the  party  chairmen  of  the 
precinct  committees  in  each  such  city,  county,  or  as- 
sembly district;  the  state  senatorial  district  committee, 
of  the  party  chairmen  of  the  assembly  district  commit- 
tees in  such  senatorial  district ;  the  congressional  com- 
mittee, of  the  party  chairmen  of  the  senatorial  district 
committees  of  the  districts  wholly  or  partially  in  such 
congressional  district;  the  state  central  committee,  of 


A   Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  411 

the  party  chairmen  of  the  various  county  committees 
of  the  State.  A  vacancy  in  the  party  precinct  commit- 
tee may  be  filled  by  the  remaining  members  of  the  com- 
mittee. In  this  way  a  complete  and  popular  party  or- 
ganization may  be  maintained  in  each  State  under  a  di- 
rect vote  system,  through  the  application  of  the  prin- 
ciple employed  in  the  nomination  of  public  officers  to 
the  selection  of  the  officers  of  the  political  parties. 

REFERENCES. 
Books. 

Bryce,  James.     American  Commonwealth.    Vol.  II.    1889. 

Cree,  Nathax     Direct  Legislation  by  the  People.     1892. 

Dallixger,  Frederick  W.    Nomination  to  Elective  Office.  1897» 

HoFER,  E.     The  American  Primary  System.     1896. 

Field,  David  Dudley.  Some  Reprehensible  Practices  of  Ameri- 
can Government.     New  York,  1896. 

McMillan,  D.  C.  The  Elective  Franchise  in  the  United  States, 
1880. 

Remsen,  Daniel  S.    Primary  Elections.     1894. 

Remsen,  Daniel  S.    Suffrage  and  the  Ballot.    1892. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore.    Essays  on  Practical  Politics.    1888. 

Strickney,  Albert.    A  True  Republic.     1879. 

Strickney,  Albert.    Democratic  Government.     1885. 

Sullivan,  J.  W.    Direct  Legislation.     1893. 

Wigmore,  J.  H.     The  Australian  Ballot  System.     1889. 

Magazine  Articles. 

Bossism.     Outlook,  Vol.  LV,  p.  226  (Jan.  16,  1897). 

California,  Primary  in.     Nation,  Vol.  XXXIV,  p.  74  (Jan. 

26,  1882). 

Caucus  Legislation.    New  Englander,  Vol.  LIV,  p.  297 

(April,  1891). 

Caucus,  Legislation  of.    Nation,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  86  (Feb.  4, 

1869). 

Caucus  and  Republican  Party.    Nation,  Vol.  VII,  p.   4 

(July  2,  1868). 

Caucus  Reform.    Harvard  Monthly,  Vol.  X,  p.  1  (Jan.  27, 

1893). 


412  Aryument  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

Caucus,  Substitutes  for  the  (Dana,  R.  H.).   Forum,  Vol.  II, 

p.  491  (Jan.,  1887). 

Caucus,  Trouble  with  the.    New  Englander,  Vol.  XXXIV, 

p.  473  (July,  1875). 

Conference,  National,  on  Primary  Elections,  Report  of. 

Public  Opinion,  Vol.  XXIV,  p.  685  (June  3,  1898). 

Convention,  Nominating.   Nation,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  429  (June  3, 

1869). 

Democracy,  Perils  Inherent  in  (Lyman  Abbott).     Outlook, 

Vol.  LXVIII,  p.  624  (July  13, 1901). 

Direct  Nominations  (Hopkins,  J.  S.).     Arena,  Vol.  XIX, 

p.  729  (June,  1898). 

Direct  Primaries.    Nation,  Vol.  LXVI,  p.  161  (March  3, 1898). 

Direct  and  Indirect  Primaries.     Outlook,  Vol.  LXVI,  p.  91 

(Sept.  8,  1900). 

Direct   Primaries  make  Headway.     Outlook,  Vol  LXV, 

p.  761  (Aug.  4,  1900). 

Direct  Primary  Movement.     Outlook,  Vol.  LVI,  p.  9  (May  1, 

1897). 

Direct  Primaries,  Dark  Side  of.     Outlook,  Vol.  LIX,  p.  797 

(July  30, 1898). 

Direct  Primaries  Demanded.    Outlook,  Vol.  LXVII,  p.  477 

(March  2,  1901). 

Direct  Primaries  and  Uniform  Accounts.     Outlook,  Vol. 

LXVIII,  p.  140  (May  18,  1901). 

Direct  Vote  at  the  Primary.     Municipal  Affairs.  Vol.  II, 

p.  176  (1898). 

Georgia,  Direct  Primaries  in.     Outlook,  Vol.  LIX,  p.  411 

(June  18,  1898). 

— . Illinois  Primary  Election  Law.     Outlook,  Vol.  LVIII,  p.  455 

(Feb.  19, 1898). 

Illinois  Primary  Law.     Outlook,  Vol.  LVIII,  p.  753  (March 

19,  1898). 

Kansas  and  Missouri,  Direct  Primaries  in.    Outlook,  Vol. 

LXIII,  p.  475  (Oct.  28,  1899). 

Kentucky,  Direct  Primaries  for  New  York  and  Chicago. 

Outlook,  Vol.  LVII,  p.  790  (Dec.  4,  1897). 

"Machine,"  American  Domestic  Problems  (Lyman  Abbott). 

Outlook,  Vol.  LXVIII,  p.  396  (June  15,  1901). 

• •'  Macliine  "    Candidates.     Outlook,  Vol.  LV,  p.  155  (Jan.  9, 

1897). 

"  Machine  "  Power,  Growth  of.    Nation,  Vol  LXXI,  p.  183 

(Sept.  6,  1900). 


A  Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  41S 

Minnesota,  Direct  Primary  Law  of.     Outlook,  Vol.  LXII, 

p.  150  (May  20,  1899). 

— '-    Minnesota,   Direct    Primaries  in.     Outlook,   Vol.   LXVI, 
p.  2y8  (Oct.  6,  1900). 

—  Minnesota,  Direct  Primaries  in.      Outlook,  Vol.  LXVII, 
p.  654  (March  28,  1901). 

Minnesota,  Direct  Primaries  in.     Outlook,  Vol.  LXVIII, 

p.  3  (May  4,  1901). 

—  Minnesota,  Hennepin  County  Primary  Law  of.    Annals  of 
American  Academy,  Vol.  XVI,  p  490  (Nov.,  1900). 

—  Minnesota,  New  Primary  Law  of  (Davis,  S.  M.).   Independ- 
ent, Vol.  LII,  p.  2495  (Oct.  18, 1900). 

—  National   Conference  on    Primary  Elections,  Report  of. 
Outlook,  Vol.  LVIII,  p.  266  (Jan.  22,  1898). 

—  Nominations  by  the  People  (Coler,  B.  S.).    Independent, 
Vol.  LI,  p.  3210  (Nov.  30,  1899). 

—  Nominating  System,  Reform  of.  Penn  Monthly,  Vol.  XII, 
p.  602  (Aug.,  1881). 

—  New  York,  Direct  Primaries  in,  under  new  law.   Outlook, 
Vol.  LIX,  p.  412  (June  18,  1898). 

—  New  York,  Hill  Bill  in.     Outlook,  Vol.  LVIII,  p.  210  (Jan. 

22,  1898). 

—  Nominating  Ballot,  Brooks   Plan.     Outlook,  Vol.  LVII, 
p.  950  (Dec.  11, 1897). 

—  Nomination,  Brooks  Plan.     Nation,  Vol.  LV,  p.  490  (Dec. 

23,  1897). 

—  North  Carolina  Direct  Primaries.     Outlook,  Vol.  LXVI, 
p.  192  (Sept.  22,  1900). 

—  Ohio,  Cleveland,  Direct  Primaries  in.    Outlook,  Vol  LX, 
p.  251  (Sept.  24,  1898). 

—  Ohio,  Direct  Primaries  in.    Outlook,  Vol.  LXIV,  p.  378 

(Feb.  17,  1900). 

—  Pennsylvania,  Direct  Primaries  in.     Outlook,  Vol  LXVI, 

p.  861  (Dec.  8,  1900). 

—  Primaries,  Concurrent.    Outlook,  Vol.  LXIII,  p.  8  (Sept. 
21,  1899). 

—  Primaries,  Public  Control  of  (Whitten,  R.  H.).    Annals 
of  American  Academy,  Vol.  XV,  p.  165  (March,  1900). 

—  Primary,  Legislation  Concerning.    Annals  of  American 
Academy,  Vol.  XI,  p.  381  (May,  1898). 

—  Primary  Legislation,  Tendency  in  (Branson,  W.  J.).    An- 
nals of  American  Academy,  Vol.  XIII,  p.  346  (May,  1899). 

—  Primary  Election  Reform.    Public  Opinion,  Vol.  XXIII, 
p.  809  (Dec.  23,  1897). 


414  ArguTnent  of  the  Direct  Primary. 

Primary,  Reform  of  tha     Gunton  Magazine,  Vol.  XIV, 


p.  153  (March,  1898). 

—  Primary  Reform,  Futility  of.     Nation,  Vol.  LXV,  p.  431 
(Dec.  2,  1897). 

—  Primaries,  Reform  of  Party.     Independent,  Vol.  L,  p.  117 
(Jan.  27.  1898). 

—  Primaries,  Regeneration  of.     Nation,  Vol.  XXXIII,  p.  486 
(Dec.  22,  1881). 

—  Primary  Election   System,  How  to  Reform  (Insley,  E.). 
Arena,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  1013  (June,  1897). 

—  Referendum,  Direct  Legislation.    Outlook,  Vol.  LX,  p.  156 
(Sept.  17,  1898). 

—  Reform,   An  Essential.    Outlook,  Vol.  LVIII,  p.  261  (Jan. 
22, 1898). 

—  Reform,  A  Necessary.    Outlook,  Vol.  LVII,  p.  943  (Dec. 
11,  1897). 

—  South  Carolina,  Direct  Primaries  in.    Outlook,  Vol.  LX, 


p.  105  (Sept.  10,  1898). 

—  South  Carolina,  Direct  Primaries  in.    Outlook,  Vol  LX, 
p.  146  (Sept.  10,  1898). 

—  South,  Direct  Primaries  in  the.    Outlook,  Vol.  LXII,  p.  248 
(June  8,  1899). 

—  Wisconsin,  Conflict  in.    Outlook,  Vol.  LIX,  p.  1001  (Aug. 
27,  1898). 

—  Wisconsin,  Direct  Primaries  in.  Outlook,  Vol.  LXV,  p.  897 
(Aug.  18,  1900). 

—  Wisconsin,  La  FoUette's  Ringing  Message.    Outlook,  Vol. 
LXVIII,  p.  199  (May  25,  1901). 

—  Wisconsin,  Lewis  Primary  Election  Law  of.     Outlook 
Vol.  LV,  p  963  (April  10,  1897). 

—  Wisconsin,  Proposed  Reform  in.   Outlook,  Vol.  LIX,  p.  759 
(July  30, 1898). 

Newspapers. 

Madison  Democrat,  1896-1903. 
Milwaukee  Free  Press.  1901-1903. 
Milwaukee  Journal,  1896-1902. 
Milwaukee  Sentinel,  1896-1902. 
Minneapolis  Journal,  1899-1902. 
Minneapolis  Tribune.  1899-1902. 
St.  Paul  Pioneer,  1899-1903. 
San  Francisco  Bulletin,  1865-1868. 
News  and  Courier  (S.  C),  1885-1903. 
Wisconsin  State  Journal,  1896-1903. 


A  Good  Direct  Primary  Law.  415 

Miscellaneous  Sources. 

Addresses:  Gov.  R.  M.  La  Follette,  before  the  University  of  Chi- 
cago, February  33,  1897,  and  before  the  University  of  Michigan, 
March  12,  1898;  also  reports  of  his  cauipaigu  speeclies  of  1896, 
189S,  and  1900. 

Addresses  before  the  Wisconsin  legislature  on  the  proposed  direct 
primary  law  of  1901,  by  H.  C.  Adams,  W.  H.  Chynoweth,  W.  D. 
Corrigan,  J.  A.  Frear,  M.  G.  Jeffris,  L.  A.  Miner,  J.  G.  Mona- 
ghan,  E.  Ray  Stevens,  H.  C.  Taylor,  J.  M.  Whitehead. 

Correspondence:  With  leading  politicians  and  important  officials 
and  primary  reformers  in  most  of  the  States. 

Court  decisions:  Including  opinions  of  the  supreme  courts  of  Cali- 
fornia, Oregon,  Pennsylvania,  Colorado,  New  York  and  others. 

Party  rules:  Governing  the  conduct  of  primary  elections  in  coun- 
ties of  a  number  of  northern  and  southern  States. 

Reports  of:  National  Primary  Election  League,  1898;  Municipal 
Leagues  in  a  number  of  large  cities;  Civil  Service  Reform 
League  pamphlets,  and  publications  of  various  other  reform  or- 
ganizations in  the  country. 

Session  laws  of  the  various  States  as  referred  to  in  foot-notes. 


PAET  TV 


THE  DIRECT  PRIMARY  IN  ITS  RELA- 
TION  TO  OTHER  REFORMS 


27 


CHAPTER  I. 

OUR  CIVIL  SERVICE  AND  ITS  REFORM. 

However  successful  the  direct  primary  reform  may 
prove,  the  evils  which  infest  our  political  system,  to-day 
cannot  be  entirely  eliminated  at  once.  Even  though 
the  best  of  men  are  nominated  and  elected,  efficiency  iu 
administration  will  nevertheless  be  marred,  because  of 
other  defects  in  our  government,  and  because  of  the  con- 
tinued subjection  of  officers  to  numerous  powerful  temp- 
tations which  must  inevitably  operate  as  a  curse  of  good 
government.  There  will  still  remain  in  many  cases  an. 
immense  and  growing  patronage — the  spoils  of  the  vic- 
torious party.  There  will  also  remain  unaffected  a  largo 
and  increasing  number  of  elective  offices,  mostly  of  short 
terms,  which  will  expand  the  duties  of  the  citizen  at  the 
primary  election,  and  will  tend  to  confuse  and  cloud  the 
voter  in  his  choice  of  candidates,  and  weary  him  with 
incessant  calls  to  the  polls.  And  finally,  there  will  still 
exist  an  opportunity  for  the  corrupt  use  of  money  in 
nominations  and  elections.  Other  reforms,  the  practica- 
bility and  possibility  of  which  will  have  been  established 
through  primary  reform,  must  be  vigorously  prosecuted. 
The  civil  service  rules  must  be  further  extended.  A 
redistribution  and  reduction  of  elective  and  of  appoint- 
ive offices  must  be  made.  Money  must  be  forced  out  of 
politics  through  the  further  enactment  of  corrupt  prac- 
tices acts. 

Important  among  these  reforms  is  that  of  the  civil 


4:20         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms* 

service.  If  carried  to  a  successful  corLsummatlon,  It 
"will  be  a  most  valuable  aid  to  primary  reform,  just  as 
primary  reform  will  pave  tbe  way  and  aid  in  the  ref- 
ormation of  the  civil  service.  Their  relation  is  recip- 
rocal. One  is  the  handmaid  of  the  other.  ^  Some  writers 
even  claim  that  the  reform  of  the  civil  service  is  of  para- 
mount importance;  that  by  applying  remedies  to  tlio 
CMjrrupt  caucuses  and  conventions  we  treat  the  apparent 
condition  only,  and  not  the  causes  that  have  brought 
them  into  their  present  disrepute ;  that  the  end  sought  in 
political  control  is,  primarily,  the  distribution  of  pat- 
ronage; and  that  true  reform  begins  with  the  elimina- 
tion of  tho  spoils  of  office  from  political  contest.^  Does 
this  seem  reasonable  ?  Are  our  modem,  powerful,  polit- 
ical "machines"  organized  for  the  dominant  purpose  of 
securing  control  of  the  spoils  of  office?  Is  the  great 
struggle  for  political  ascendency  to-day  waged  by  "ma- 
chines" with  the  expenditure  of  enormou8  sums  of 
money,  amounting  to  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars 
in  single  States,  at  times,  merely  for  the  sake  of  ob- 
taining possession  of  political  positions  which  in  their 
total  remuneration  are  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  heavy 
expense  involved  in  their  procurement  ?  Is  not  the 
modem  political  "machine"  organized  rather  for  the  up- 
building of  special  interests,  for  the  promotion  of  pri- 
vate enterprises,  for  the  advancement  of  favored  cor- 
porate businesses  ?  Is  not  the  attainment  of  these  larger 
prizes,  greater  rewards,  higher  returns,  the  ambition 
of  modern  political  combinations  ?  Proof  of  this  fact 
lies  bare  in  all  political  units,  from  the  town  to  the  Na- 

« Eaton,  Dorman  B.,  Civil  Service  Reform,  Lalor's  Cyclopedia  of  Political 
Science. 
»  Dana,  R.  H.,  Forum,  Vol.  U,  p,  499  (Jan.,  1887). 


Civil  Service  lieform.  421 

tion.     In  our  cities  the  representatives  of  "machines'* 
and  of  corporate  interests  intrude  themselves  into  the 
councils,  and  lobby  for  ordinances  and  franchises  grant- 
ing special  privileges.    The  legislative  balls  of  our  Com- 
monwealths are  besieged  by  corporation  agents  and  polit- 
ical boodlers  for  the  purpose  of  controlling  legislation 
for  the  upbuilding  of  special  interests — for  the  defeat  of 
efficient  measures  aiming  at  taxation  reform,  or  primary 
reform.    In  our  national  legislature  similar  political  and 
corporate  influences  are  brought  to  bear,  by  use  of  the 
power  of  money,  for  similar  ends.     Thousands  of  dol- 
lars are  contributed  to  party  campaign  funds,  or  spent 
in  regular  legislative  lobby,  for  the  defeat  or  passage  of 
subsidy  bills ;  for  the  advancement  of  sugar  trust  inter- 
ests, or  of  steel  combines ;  for  the  modification  of  tariff 
schedules  which  will  increase  the  profits  of  great  manu- 
factures.   How  inconsiderable  and  trifling  the  spoils  of 
office  appear  in  comparison  with  these  greater  gains 
through  politics!     These  spoils  of  office  are  no  longer, 
as  in  the  days  of  Jackson,  the  dominating  prize.     They 
have  become  subsidiary,  and  have  been  reduced  from  an 
end  in  themselves  to  a  means  for  the  attainment  of  still 
greater  ends. 

This  change  in  the  relation  of  patronage  to  political 
control  is  significant,  but,  as  will  be  seen,  by  no  means 
argues  against  the  importance  of  civil  service  reform, 
for  the  corrupt  use  of  patronage,  while  vicious  in  itself, 
is  to-day,  as  a  means  for  the  advancement  of  special  in- 
terests, and  for  the  perversion  of  representative  govern- 
ment, productive  of  far  greater  wrong  than  ever  in  the 
past.  That  patronage  should  to-day  be  a  powerful  in- 
strument in  the  hands  of  political  "machines,"  is  but 


422         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms, 

natural.  The  office  may  mean  little  or  nothing,  from  a 
financial  point  of  view,  to  the  "machine"  which  possesses 
the  power  of  bestowing  it,  but  it  means  much  to  the  man 
upon  whom  it  is  bestowed  in  recognition  of  loyal  sup- 
port and  faithful  service.  Through  the  tactful  distribu- 
tion of  these  rewards,  the  "machine"  is  enabled  to  draw 
to  itself  a  band  of  faithful  workers  whose  unscrupulous 
industry  makes  its  defeat  difficult,  and  enables  it  to  gain 
the  larger  prizes  at  which  it  aims.  However,  even  a 
more  powerful  and  immediately  effective  instrument  of 
evil,  than  patronage,  is  money  in  its  various  forms,  as 
handled  by  the  briber.  It  would  seem  that  the  corrupt 
use  of  money  in  politics  is  by  far  more  productive  of 
wrong  in  government  than  is  the  manipulation  of  the 
spoils  of  office. 

We  must  conclude,  then,  that  since  the  control  and 
disposition  of  patronage  is  to-day,  generally,  but  inci- 
dental to  political  control,  rather  than  its  sole  purpose; 
and  since  it  does  not  even  appear  to  be  the  most  impor- 
tant means  of  political  control,  the  reform  of  the  civil 
service  cannot  logically  be  termed  as  one  of  paramount 
importance.  A  paramount  reform,  in  general  lan- 
guage, may  probably  be  defined  as  one  which  strikes  at 
the  fundamental  political  difficulties  involved  in  the  en- 
actment and  administrat'on  of  good  laws ;  which  is  cap- 
able of  successful  prosecution  under  existing  conditions; 
and  which  is  sufficiently  thorough  and  general  in  its 
effect  to  permit  of  the  institution  of  related  reforms 
which  without  it  could  not  be  effectively  carried  for- 
ward. These  characteristics  are  not  common  to  the  civil 
service  reform.  The  possibility  of  its  effective  prosecu- 
tion under  existing  conditions  is  largely  contradicted 


Civil  Service  Reform,  423 

by  the  history  of  the  reform.  The  reason  for  this  is 
obvious.  The  reform  must  be  worked  out  through  the 
agency  of  government  by  means  of  thorough  legislation. 
Ueason  tells  us  that  where  reform  is  needed,  and  ad- 
mittedly the  need  is  general,  government  is  being  abused. 
It  is  in  the  hands  of  men  who  find  advantage  in  the  use 
of  the  spoils  of  office.  It  may  be  directly  under  the  con- 
trol of  a  political  "machine."  Can  we  expect  such  an 
agency  to  institute  a  reform  which  strikes  a  blow  at  its 
own  power,  the  retention  of  which  is  its  burning  pur- 
pose ?  The  suggestion  is  easily  made  that  since  office 
and  money  are  the  two  sources  of  life  of  the  dema- 
gogue and  of  the  professional  politician,  it  is  but  neces- 
sary to  cut  off  their  supply  in  order  to  achieve  the  de- 
struction of  these  political  parasites.  This  is  good  ad- 
vice, but  under  modem  political  conditions  it  is  im- 
practicable and  incapable  of  effective  application.  No 
legislature  dominated  by  "machine"  influences  will  vol- 
untarily cut  off  the  supply  of  office  through  civil  service 
reform  legislation,  or  remove  the  opportunity  of  using 
money  in  politics  through  corrupt  practices  acts.  Such 
action  would  be  political  suicide  and  hence  unnatural 
and  not  likelv  to  be  taken.  It  is  necessarv  first  to  reform 
the  agency  through  which  these  other  reforms  may  then 
be  instituted.  Representative  men  who  will  faithfully 
execute  the  will  of  the  people  in  matters  of  reform  must 
be  placed  in  office.  This  can  be  accomplished  only  by 
means  of  the  improvement  of  our  nominating  system, 
through  the  defective  workings  of  which  politicians  are 
enabled  to  control  government.  While,  therefore,  the 
reform  of  the  civil  service  cannot  be  considered  of  pri- 
mary importance,  but  rather  as  auxiliary  and  supple- 


424         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

mentary  in  character,  tlie  necessity  of  its  prosecution 
must  not  be  minimized  because  political  reform  is  not 
.  complete  without  the  elimination  of  the  spoils  system. 

Before  attempting  to  indicate  a  line  of  reform  it  is 
well  to  take  a  cursory  view  of  the  problem  itself.  The 
government  of  this  country  is  a  huge  undertaking.  The 
task  is  a  mighty  one  and  needs  many  hands.  Some  of 
these  hands  must  direct  the  policies  and  shape  the  des- 
tinies of  the  Nation,  while  others  are  mere  cogs  in  the 
wheels,  indispensable  in  their  place,  but  turning  in 
obedience  to  commands.  The  first  are  political  in  char- 
acter, the  second  ministerial.  Both  are  fought  for  by 
the  political  parties.  The  first  rightly  belong  to  the 
•victor,  the  second  do  not.^ 

Our  country,  like  any  other  free  and  democratic  land, 
can  only  be  governed  by  political  parties,  and  whichever 
party  successfully  contests  for  the  trust  and  honor  must, 
by  election  or  appointment,  fill  with  its  own  representa- 
tives those  offices  which  control  the  policy  of  which  the 
country  has  expressed  its  approval  by  putting  the  party 
into  power.  These  are  the  legitimate  spoils  of  victory. 
But  the  government  of  the  United  States,  the  States, 
counties,  cities,  towns,  and  villages  have  employes  whose 
duties  are  merely  administrative  and  ministerial,  with- 
out any  political  charac*"er  or  significance.  These  em- 
ployes— "in  number  as  the  sands  of  the  sea" — consti- 
tute what  is  known  as  the  "Civil  Service"  of  the  country. 
At  present  their  selection  for  appointment  is,  in  almost 
all  cases,  made,  not  from  any  test  of  fitness  or  ability, 
determined  upon  the  basis  of  competitive  examination, 
but  solely  by  personal  or  political  influence,  and  as  a  re- 

>  Hoard,  G.  F.,  Inaugural  Address  before  American  Historical  Society,  1896. 


Civil  Service  Iicform.  425 

ward  for  personal  and  partisan  services.  They  hold 
their  offices  only  during  the  pleasure  of  the  appointing 
power,  and  subject  to  the  liability  of  political  assess- 
ment. 

The  results  of  tliis  system  abound  in  evil.  Eligibility 
to  public  office  is  determined,  not  by  competence,  but  by 
political  influence.  Legislators  besiege  the  departments 
of  government  in  order  to  secure  appointments  to  office 
for  their  constituents  and  political  dependents,  and  when 
there  are  no  vacancies  to  bo  filled  they  create  unneces- 
sary offices.  The  influence  of  the  em.ployes,  thus  foisted 
upon  the  public  service  by  tlie  abuse  of  patronage,  keeps 
in  legislative  power  those  who  are  not  worthy  of  any 
public  or  private  trust  The  employe  acts  for  individ- 
uals, not  for  the  people,  or  for  the  sake  of  good  govern- 
ment. Appointment  to,  as  well  as  continuance  in,  and 
promotion  in,  the  public  service  being  dependent  upon 
political  or  personal  influence,  party  service  (which 
commonly  means  "boss"  and  "machine"  service)  takes, 
in  the  employe's  mind,  the  place  of  loyalty  to  the 
country,  and  the  faithful  performance  of  public  duty. 
Hence,  discipline  cannot  be  maintained  in  the  public 
service ;  competent  employes  who  cannot,  or  will  not, 
do  political  work,  are  dismissed.  The  office-holders  be- 
come an  army  of  political  mercenaries;  by  their  con- 
tribution they  create  a  corruption  fund;  and  under  the 
orders  of  their  leaders,  they  pack  aominating  conven- 
tions, and  by  force  of  fraud,  control  elections. 

As  a  result  pure  and  able  men  who  will  not  stoop  to 
practice  the  arts  of  the  politician,  and  whose  service 
the  country  cannot  afford  to  lose,  find  the  avenues  to  pub- 
lic employment  closed  to  them.    The  maladministration. 


42G         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

which  follows  is  charged  to  the  people,  and  presented 
as  evidence  of  the  inexpediency  of  democratic  rule. 
Thus,  confidence  in  popular  government  is  destroyed, 
and  faith  in  the  j)erpetuity  of  our  free  institutions 
diminished.  Certainly,  here  is  a  problem  that  is  serious. 
It  is  a  situation  worthy  of  the  best  thought  of  the  de- 
mocracy's best  brains.  Bad  government  may  be  im- 
proved by  removing  evils  present  in  our  nomination 
and  election  machinery,  but  it  cannot  be  entirely  cured 
without  the  reform  of  the  civil  service.  Something  has 
already  been  done  in  this  direction,  but  the  main  task 
remains  undone. 

Civil  service  reform  legislation  is  still  in  its  infancy 
in  most  of  the  States.  A  national  law  of  considerable 
thoroughness  was,  however,  enacted  in  1883.  It  em- 
powered the  president  to  appoint,  by  and  with  the  ad- 
vice and  consent  of  the  Senate,  three  persons,  not  more 
than  two  of  them  adherents  of  the  same  party,  as  a  com- 
mission, with  authority  to  prescribe  regulations  in  pur- 
suance of,  and  for  the  execution  of  the  provisions  of 
the  civil  service  act.  As  a  result  the  "merit  system" 
came  into  being.  Changes  were  made  in  the  rules  drawn 
by  the  commission,  May  6,  1806,  July  27^  1897,  and 
May  27,  1899,  so  that  at  present  they  form  a  very  much 
improved  system. 

Among  the  four  States  having  civil  service  rules  New 
York  ranks  first.  The  original  act  in  this  State  was 
passed  in  1883,*  and  followed  closely  the  form  of  the 
Federal  act.  It  was  amended  from  time  to  time  in  vari- 
ous important  respects  until  finally  a  new  act  was  passed 
in  1899,^  codifying  and  uniting  all  previous  acts  and  ex- 

>  Session  Laws  of  New  York,  1883,  ch.  354. 
»  Session  Laws  of  New  York,  1899.  ch.  370. 


Civil  Service  Reform  427 

tending  very  considerably  the  area  of  their  operation. 
The  operation  of  the  new  charter  for  New  York  city  re- 
pealed the  "Black  Act"  of  1894  on  January  1,  1899, 
and  on  July  11  of  that  year  the  charter  rules  were 
superseded  by  rules  framed  in  pursuance  of  the  new 
law.  These  rules  restored  all  of  the  essential  features 
of  the  genuine  merit  system,  and  are  expected  to  keep 
the  city  service  on  a  fairly  competitive  basis  open  to  all 
citizens.  Stringent  inhibitions  upon  payment  of  sal- 
aries to  persons  improperly  appointed  reinforcing  those 
previously  in  force,  add  to  the  effectiveness  of  tlie  sys- 
tem. Since  the  "Black  Act"  is  still  in  force  in  the  de- 
partments and  institutions  of  the  State,  and  the  act  of 
1883  still  operates  in  Buffalo,  Rochester,  and,  in  fact, 
in  every  other  city  of  the  State,  except  New  York,  which 
has  its  own  system,  there  are  at  present  three  different 
systems  of  appointment  in  operation  within  the  bounds 
of  New  York  State. 

In  Massachusetts  an  act  was  passed  in  1884  closely 
resembling  the  New  York  act,  and  applying  to  every  city 
in  the  State.  In  Illinois  the  act  of  1895  permits  all 
cities  to  establish  the  "merit  system"  by  popular  vote. 
In  pursuance  of  the  law,  rules  were  adopted  by  large 
popular  majorities  in  Chicago  and  Evanston.  A  similar 
act  was  passed  in  Wisconsin  applying  to  cities  of  the 
first  class,  and  in  actual  operation  therefore  only  in  the 
city  of  Milwaukee.  In  several  other  States  civil  serv- 
ice rules  are  in  operation  in  isolated  cities,  established 
by  amendments  to  their  charters.  In  Philadelphia  ex- 
aminations are  provided  for  by  the  so-called  "Bullitt 
Bill."  Persons  admitted  to  competition  must,  however, 
be  satisfactory  to  the  appointing  officer,  and  the  exam- 


428  JJtreci  Primary  and  Oilier  Reforms. 

inations  are  conducted  by  boards  witbin  the  deparfr- 
ments,  so  tbat  in  actual  operation  tbe  system  amounts 
practically  to  notbing. 

San  Francisco,  California,  and  Seattle,  Wasliington, 
have  rules  applying  to  all  brancbes  of  tbe  city  service, 
recently  placed  in  operation  as  a  result  of  cbarter 
amendments  adopted  by  popular  vote.  Similar  rules 
are  in  operation  as  a  result  of  tbe  cbarter  amendments 
coming  from  legislative  enactments,  or  from  cbarter 
commissions  in  Columbus,  Obio,  and  New  Haven,  Con- 
necticut. A  set  of  rules  is  also  provided  for  by  tbe  cbar- 
ter of  Indianapolis,  but  tbe  system  in  tbat  city  was  tem- 
porarily set  aside  by  tbe  arbitrary  action  of  tbe  mayor 
in  1896.  In  Portland,  Oregon,  and  Louisville,  Ken- 
tucky, tbere  are  rules  applying  to  certain  departments 
but  not  to  all. 

Tbis  appears  to  be  all  tbe  civil  service  reform  legisla- 
tion of  wbieli  tbe  United  States  can  boast.  Mucb  good 
has  already  been  accomplished,  but  many  more  laws  are 
needed.  Tbe  process  of  getting  them  must  necessarily 
be  slow.  Tbe  powers  tbat  are  affected  by  tbe  reform 
are  of  tremendous  strength,  and  are  securely  situated. 
In  many  cases  they  control  tbe  legislatures,  which  alone 
can  smite  them.  Single-banded  opposition  is  as  nothing. 
A  few  fanatical  reformers  who  stand  wringing  their 
hands,  and  crying  out  into  the  world  to  help  make 
straight  the  way,  cannot  accomplish  much.  It  is  neces- 
sary to  arouse  a  healthy  interest  in  the  reform  through 
the  education  of  the  masses  to  actual  conditions.  This 
takes  time,  and  is  slow,  up-hill  work,  but  it  is  sure,  and 
when  once  an  active  and  intelligent  public  opinion  baa 
been  created,  this,  if  enabled  to  effectively  ex^^ress  itself 


Civil  Service  Reform.  429 

throngli  reformed  nomination  and  election  macliinerv, 
will  of  itself  compel  the  enactment  of  the  necessary  legis- 
lation. It  is  upon  this  principle  that  our  great  civil 
sei'vice  reformers,  such  as  Schurz,  Jenks.  Curtis,  and 
Eaton,  are  acting.  Little  can  be  accomplished  without 
the  people.  It  is  necessary  to  arouse  public  sentiment 
in  its  favor,  and  to  direct  it  into  the  legislatures,  if  re- 
form is  to  be  lasting.  Otherwise  it  cannot  but  lose  itself 
and  discredit  its  worth  through  recurring  relapses  and 
reactions.  Ephenieral  reform  is  neither  warm  nor  cold, 
and  will  invariably  be  repudiated  by  the  people. 

The  experience  of  England  furnishes  an  excellent  ex- 
ample of  how  civil  service  reform  must  progress.  After 
several  ill-fated  attempts,  reformers  in  that  country  be- 
came convinced  that  all  expectations  of  suddenly  chang- 
ing the  character  and  tone  of  the  60,000  or  more  persons 
who  made  up  the  civil  service  of  Great  Britain — a  char- 
acter and  tone  which  were  the  growth  of  generations 
— ^were  utterly  chimerical.  It  was  discovered  that  any 
attempt  to  accomplish  at  once  a  full  reform,  recoiled 
upon  them  with  disastrous  effect.^  Wise  methods, 
steadily  and  faithfully  applied  for  the  education  of  the 
public,  at  the  same  time  that  they  closed  the  fountain  of 
mischief,  and  not  sweeping,  revolutionary  proceedings 
which  assumed  that  the  moral  tone  of  a  Nation's  politics 
could  be  changed  by  an  assault  or  an  exhortation,  were 
found  to  be  the  essential  features  of  reform. 

In  the  United  States,  it  seems  that  this  principle  of 
gradual  refoiTQ,  supported  by  public  opinion,  was  vio- 
lated, and  this  it  is  claimed  has  been  the  cause  of  a  recoil 
which  has  for  the  last  few  years  acted  most  powerfully 

>  Eaton,  Dorman  B.,  Civil  Service  Reform  in  England, 


430         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

against  the  cause  of  the  reformers.  Advantage,  it  ap- 
pears, was  taken  of  the  Reform  Act  of  1883,  while  in 
1896,  as  a  result  of  the  power  conferred  upon  the  re- 
formers, 30,000  positions  were  swept  into  the  classified 
service  through  legislation.  This  was  done  with  such 
'disregard  of  practical  considerations  that  it  became  nec- 
<^ssary  to  begin  to  make  exceptions  almost  immediately 
in  order  to  keep  the  necessary  machinery  of  the  govern- 
ment from  l>eing  thrown  out  of  gear,  because  of  the  num- 
ber of  changes  made  in  positions  where  men,  familiar 
with  the  details  of  the  work,  were  swept  out  of  office 
by  law,  only  to  be  superseded  by  new  men  unfamiliar 
with  the  work  of  their  positions.  Too  much  force  also 
seems  to  have  been  used  by  reformers  in  attempting 
legislation.  Instead  of  winning  legislators  to  the  cause 
by  first  winning  over  the  people,  influences  were  brought 
to  bear  to  compel  legislation.  If  these  facts  have  been 
correctly  studied  and  lie  at  the  bottom  of  the  reaction 
which  the  civil  service  reform  appears  to  be  suffering 
at  present,  then  it  may  be  well  closely  to  follow  the  ex- 
periences of  England  by  building  the  reform  slow  but 
sure  from  the  fiber  of  the  people. 

Civil  service  reform  also  appears  to  be  suffering 
through  the  withdrawal  of  public  interest  from  home 
affairs,  and  its  concentration  upon  the  glittering  charms 
of  an  imperial  policy.  It  is  argued  by  some  in  favor 
of  a  policy  of  expansion  on  the  part  of  the  United  States 
"that  increased  national  res^wnsibility  will  purify  the 
public  service  and  the  morale  and  wisdom  of  American 
administration.  In  support  of  this  view,  the  example 
of  Great  Britain  is  appealed  to,  the  purity  of  its  civil 
service  being  ascribed  to  the  tonic  effect  of  continuously 


Civil  Service  Ecfonn.  431 

expanding  responsibility."  ^  The  fallacy  of  this  argu- 
ment is  shown  by  Professor  Heinsch  in  discussing  the 
influence  of  imperialism  on  home  affairs  in  the  United 
States.  "After  two  liundred  years  of  expansion,  and 
up  to  the  very  close  of  the  eighteenth  century,  English 
■civil  sendee  and  the  general  political  life  of  England 
were  as  corrupt  as  ever.  The  great  and  lasting  reform, 
on  the  other  hand,  was  effected  only  in  the  era  of  liber- 
alism, when  public  interest  was  concentrated  on  home 
questions,  and  when  imperial  and  colonial  interests  were 
in  the  background."  At  present  we  have  in  the  United 
States  "every  indication  that  popular  interest  is  being 
unduly  withdrawn  from  questions  of  domestic  politics. 
This  indifferent  attitude  of  the  popular  mind  has  em- 
boldened professional  politicians  to  se«k  to  strengthen 
their  position  by  beginning  to  break  down  the  system 
of  civil  service  reform." 

The  force  of  this  contention  as  far  as  it  bears  upon 
home  reform  cannot  be  denied,  but  as  an  argument 
against  imperialism  it  has  now  become  somewhat  tardy. 
We  have  expanded.  Through  the  inevitable  flow  of 
events  the  United  States  has  taken  a  step  which  cannot 
be  retraced.  The  Philippines  and  other  islands  are  now 
in  our  possession  to  be  kept  as  a  sacred  trust  to  humanity, 
and  to  be  molded  for  the  betterment  of  life  and  for  the 
advancement  of  world  civilization.  Imperialism  is  no 
longer  a  "question,"  a  consideration  of  future  policy. 
It  would  seem,  then,  that  our  home  refonns  have  sud- 
denly been  thrust  upon  the  brink  of  a  serious  and  un- 
avoidable danger.  However,  it  is  not  well  to  grow  pes- 
simistic.   While  the  present  policy  of  imperialism  may 

» Professor  Paul  S.  Reinsch  in  '•  World  Politics,"  p.  349. 


432         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Beforms. 

temporarily  check  reform  at  home,  such  is  the  history 
of  American  life,  and  such  the  make-up  of  the  Amer- 
ican citizen,  that  with  the  gi'owing  duties  and  burdens  of 
their  countr)'^,  and  with  a  continued  and  rapid  spread  of 
education,  the  "new  light"  will  widen  the  horizon  of  the 
American  people,  and  will  continue  this  Nation  in  its 
career  of  prosperity  and  progress  through  the  patient 
and  wise  acceptance  and  performance  of  the  "white 
man's  duties"  both  at  home  and  abroad. 

The  principles  upon  which  civil  service  reform  legis- 
lation ought  to  be  based,  may  be  briefly  restated  from  the 
English  laws,  and  are  as  follows: 

All  non-political  offices  in  the  public  service  must  be 
filled  only  by  selection  from  among  those  graded  highest 
after  oj^en  competitive  examinations,  conducted  upon 
a  uniform  system,  and  under  the  supervision  of  officers 
not  subject  to  partisan  influences. 

Original  entry  in  the  public  service  shall  be  at  the 
lowest  grade. 

A  period  of  probation  must  precede  absolute  appoint- 
ment. 

Tenure  of  office  is  to  be  determined  by  good  behavior. 

Promotion  must  be  from  the  lower  to  the  higher 
grades,  on  the  basis  of  merit  and  competition. 

No  public  employe  shall  be  compelled  to  contribute 
to  any  political  fund,  or  to  render  any  political  service. 

No  public  employe  shall  be  pemiitted  to  use  his 
official  authority  to  influence  or  coerce  the  political  ac- 
tion of  any  person  or  body. 

Legislation  embodying  these  principles  would  strike 
at  the  heart  of  the  difficulty,  and  there  is  no  reason 
why  the  result  should  not  be  as  gratifying  as  it  was  in 


Civil  Service  Iteform.  433 

-England.  Of  the  two  staffs  of  life  of  the  politician, 
office  and  money,  the  supply  of  the  first  would  he  en- 
tirely cut  off,  while  that  of  the  second  would  be  reduced. 
However,  the  absence  of  offices  would  make  the  need 
for  money  even  more  urgent  than  at  present.  It  is  of 
still  greater  importance,  therefore,  to  stop  the  supply  of 
money.  How  this  may  be  accomplished  can  also  be 
learned  from  English  experience.  The  passage  of  the 
Sir  Henry  James  Act  in  1883  completely  rescued  that 
country  from  the  excessive  use  of  money  from  which 
it  had  been  suffering.  This  act,  and  the  civil  service 
reform  laws  together,  have  raised  the  English  public 
service  to  a  standard  unapproached  by  any  other  nation, 
save  probably  Germany,  and  no  good  reason  appears 
why  the  same  cannot  be  accomplished  in  the  United 
States. 

The  reform  which  aims  at  the  exclusion  of  money 
from  nominations  and  elections  through  the  enactment 
of  corrupt  practices  legislation,  will  be  shortly  touched 
upon,  after  having  first  briefly  reviewed  another  change 
in  our  methods  in  politics  W'hich  the  reform  of  our  civil 
service  will  greatly  encourage,  and  which  is  already 
being  instituted,  though  imder  disadvantages, — namely, 
the  reduction  in  number  of  elective  offices  together  with 
an  increase  in  their  length  of  terms. 

REFERENCES.! 

Atkinson,  Hoffman.  Civil  Service  by  Special  Training.  Forum, 
Vol.  XXVIII,  p.  293  (November,  1899). 

Curtis,  George  William.  Papers  and  Addresses  on  Civil  Serv- 
ice.    1883-93. 

'  The  literature  upon  this  subject  is  very  copious.    Only  a  few  of  the  more 
important  references  are  here  given. 

28 


4:3i         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

Eaton,  Dorman  B.  The  Civil  Service  in  Great  Britain.  A  His- 
tory of  Abuses  and  Reforms  and  their  Bearing  upon  Ameri- 
can Politics.     1877. 

Eaton,  Dorman  B.  A  New  Phase  of  Reform  Movement.  North 
American  Review,  p.  546  (May,  1881). 

EORD,  H.  J.  Political  Evolution  and  Civil  Service  Reform.  An- 
nals of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  Science,  p.  145 
(March,  1900). 

GODKIN,  E.  L.    A  Chapter  in  the  History  of  Civil  Service  Reform 
Nation,  Vol.  II,  p.  413  (June  15,  1871). 

GoDKiN,  E.  L.  Public  Opinion  and  the  Civil  Service.  Forum, 
Vol.  VIII,  p.  237  (November,  1889). 

Hart,  Albert  Bushnell.  Do  the  People  Wish  Reform?  Forum, 
Vol.  IX,  p.  47  (March,  1890). 

Jenckes,  T.  A-     Civil  Service  in  the  United  States. 

Johnson,  Joseph  F.  Is  Civil  Service  Reform  in  Peril?  North 
American  Review,  Vol  CLXIX,  p.  678  (November,  1899). 

Nelson,  H.  L.  Purpose  of  Civil  Service  Reform.  Forum,  Vol- 
XXX,  p.  608  (December,  1900). 

Roosevelt,  Theodore.  The  Merit  System  versus  the  Patronage 
System.     Century,  p.  628  (February,  1890). 

Salmon,  Lucy  M.  History  of  the  Appointing  Power  of  the  Presi- 
dent.   1866. 

Underwood,  Oscar  W.  The  Corrupting  Power  of  Public  Pa- 
tronage.    Forum,  Vol.  XXXI,  p.  557  (July,  1901). 

White,  Andrew  D.  Do  the  Spoils  Belong  to  the  Victor?  North 
American  Review,  Vol.  CXXXIV,  p.  Ill  (February,  1882). 

Annual  Publications  of  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform  League^ 

Proceedings  of  the  Annual  Meetings  of  the  National  Municipal 
League. 
The  Civil  Service  Record. 
The  Civil  Service  Chronicle. 
The  Civil  Service  Reformer, 
Good  Government. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  REDUCTION  AND  REDISTRIBUTION  OF  ELECTIVE 
AND    APPOINTIVE    OFFICES. 

The  institution  of  direct  primaries,  and  tlie  extension 
of  the  civil  service  law  wherever  possible  in  state  govern- 
ments, wonld  also  make  way  for  other  readjustments 
in  our  political  system  which  would  promote  the  cause 
of  good  government.  The  way  would  be  cleared  for 
a  reduction  in  the  number  of  elective  offices,  which  in 
turn  would  promote  primary  reform  by  easing  the  opera- 
tion of  the  direct  vote  system.  The  possibility  of  these 
changes  arises  from  the  fact  that  under  civil  service 
rules  many  offices,  now  arbitrarily  appointive,  would  be 
filled  through  competition,  i.  e.  examination.  In  this 
way  patronage  would  be  enormously  reduced,  and  no  pos- 
sible danger  could  result  from  a  slight  counteraction  by 
making  certain  offices  appointive  which  are  now  elective. 

That  to-day  there  are  many  offices  in  our  government 
from  the  smallest  to  the  largest  political  units,  which 
are  filled  by  election,  but  which  ought  to  be  filled  by  ap- 
pointment, can  hardly  be  questioned.  The  reason  for 
this  lies  open.  As  a  result  of  the  abuse  of  the  appoint- 
ing power  due  to  the  inauguration  of  the  spoils  system, 
many  offices,  which  otherwise  would  never  have  been 
made  elective,  were  made  so.  In  our  local  governments 
the  election  of  such  officers  as  county  clerks,  constables, 
registers  of  deeds,  coroners,  justices,  judges,  and  sher- 
iffs, whose  functions  are  in  no  sense  representative,  and 


436         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Beforras. 

who  were  appointed  until  tlie  spoils  system  had  become 
established,  is  indefensible  upon  any  sound  principles.* 
The  voter,  alarmed  at  the  abuses  of  the  appointing  power, 
only  too  readily  consented  to  the  change  in  the  hope 
that  it  would  be  an  improvement.  But  it  is  well  to  bear 
in  mind  that  this  was  a  forced  change — an  expedient 
resorted  to  under  the  stress  of  pressing  emergency,  en- 
tirely unsupported  by  any  firm  theory,  or  any  question 
of  expediency.  Some  of  these  offices  might  probably 
well  be  made  once  more  appointive  by  the  governor  as 
they  were  originally,  while  the  functions  of  others  are 
of  such  a  nature  that  where  county  and  city  lines  are 
identical,  their  assumption  by  the  cities  is  made  possible. 
The  touchstone  principle,  which  it  is  well  to  bear  in 
miind  in  connection  with  this  phase  of  our  political  sys- 
tem, was  tersely  put  by  Chief  Justice  Kyan  when  he 
said,  "Where  you  want  skill,  you  must  appoint ;  where 
you  want  representation,  elect." 

In  the  city  governments  the  situation  is  very  much 
the  same  as  in  the  counties.  Just  which  officers  ought 
to  be  appointed  and  which  elected  depends  upon  their 
position  in  the  municipal  organization,  as  well  as  upon 
the  exact  relation  in  which  the  city  stands  to  tlie  entire 
plan  of  government  in  the  Commonwealth.  Since,  under 
American  municipal  government,  the  city  is  an  import- 
ant agent  of  the  general  state  government,  the  mayor 
and  council,  as  standing  for  representation,  should  be 
elected.  To  this  may  be  added  the  treasurer,  over  whom 
effective  control   is   indispensable,   although   the  same 

'  Eaton,  Dorman  B.,  in  Lalor's  Cyclopedia  of  Political  Science,  p.  349.  The 
frequent  abuse  of  the  appointing:  power  in  case  of  judicial  officers  in  recent  years 
has  challenged  the  wisdom  of  an  appointive  judiciary,  so  that  justices  and  judges 
might  probably,  with  reason,  be  omitted  from  this  list. 


Elective  and  Aj>pointive  Offices.  437 

could  probably  be  accomplished  by  a  central  audit  of 
accounts.^  In  the  larger  cities  of  the  country  the  elect- 
ive principle  has  already  been  considerably  restricted 
with  good  results,  and  with  the  purification  of  our  mu- 
nicipal governments  this  tendency  will  undoubtedly  be 
greatly  strengthened. 

The  same  problem  presents  itself  in  the  administra- 
tion of  our  Commonwealths.     Certain  elective  offices 
might  well  be  made  appointive  by  the  governor,  who  is  in 
need  of  greater  control  over  a  highly  decentralized  ad- 
ministration.    Accompanying  the  remarkable  develo]> 
ment  of  life  in  every  direction  within  recent  years,  there 
has  been  a  rapid  expansion  of  governmental  activity, 
characterized  by  the  organization  of  new  executive  de- 
partments in  the  States.    The  tendency  in  their  creation 
has  been  towards  the  single-headed  system  in  which  the 
highest  office  is  made  elective,  and  the  subordinate  posi- 
tions are  filled  by  the  elected  head.     This  has  resulted 
in  a  scattering  of  the  executive  power  among  numerous 
individuals,  boards,  commissioners,  and  departments  of 
various  kinds,  each  largely  independent  of  the  other  as 
Avell  as  of  the  chief  executive  of  the  State.    Their  tenure 
generally  differs  from  that  of  the  governor ;  their  popular 
election  makes  them  responsible  to  the  people;  their 
statutory  position  as  creatures  of  the  legislature,  from 
which  their  powers  spring,  demands  some  subservience 
to  that  body;  their  discretionary  and  sometimes  auto- 
cratic power,  eliminates  all  feelings  of  so-called  cabinet 
responsibility.      Practically  the  only  forces   operating 
to  produce  unity  and  harmony  within  the  system  are 
those  which  spring  from  the  personal  influence  of  the 

>  Groodnow,  "Municipal  Problems,"  p.  188. 


438         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

governor,  and  from  the  application  of  tlie  theory  of 
party  responsibility,  under  whicli  the  dominant  party 
holds  its  public  servants  accountable  for  their  acts,  and 
through  which  it  becomes  the  common  aim  of  the  of- 
ficers entrusted  with  the  administration  of  affairs  to 
maintain  their  party  in  power  by  popular  go-s'emment. 

Since  the  governor's  appointing  power  is  generally 
limited  to  a  few  constitutional  and  statutory  positions, 
and  those  of  a  more  or  less  private  character  in  his  own 
office,  ^\'hile  his  power  of  removal  is  often  even  more  re- 
stricted, his  position  is  largely  governmental  or  political 
in  character,  and  lacks  the  proper  dignity  and  import- 
ance which  ought  to  surround  the  chair  of  the  chief  ex- 
ecutive of  an  American  Commonwealth.  In  some  cases, 
it  is  true,  the  heads  of  departments  are  appointed  by  the 
governor.  But  there  is  frequently  no  system  or  principle 
applied  to  detennine  which  department  may  most  wisely 
be  placed  under  popular  control  tlirough  election,  and 
which  may  best  be  centralized  under  the  administrative 
head.  In  Wisconsin,  for  example,  the  Commissioner  of 
Labor  and  Statistics,  the  Board  of  Control,  and  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  are  appointed  by  the 
governor,  while  the  Insurance  Commissioner  and  the 
Railro.ad  Commissioner  are  elected.  Certainly  posi- 
tions like  the  latter  require  as  much  technical  knowledge 
and  special  ability  for  their  proper  execution  as  do  the 
former.  The  problem  of  getting  the  right  man  in  the 
right  place  is  equally  important  in  both  cases.  The 
people  are  no  more  able  to  judge  of  the  proper  qualifi- 
cations of  an  Insurance  Commissioner,  than  they  are 
of  a  Commissioner  of  Labor  and  Statistics.  HSo  reasons 
appear  why  a  distinction  should  be  made  between  elec- 


Elective  and  Appointive  Offices.  430 

tion  and  appointment  in  case  of  these  offices.  The  cause 
of  good  government  is  by  no  means  aided  throngh  the 
I)opiilarization  of  offices  "without  principle  and  aim. 
!Reason  and  duty  would  seem  to  call  for  a  sacrifice  of 
popular  control  and  political  profennent  to  efficiency; 
and  for  the  establishment  of  our  commonwealth  admin- 
istration upon  a  more  centralized  basis,  by  conferring 
upon  the  governor  the  power  of  appointment  of  the  heads 
of  departments,  and  of  such  subordinates  as  will  insure 
the  sympathetic  cooperation  of  all  the  executive  officers 
of  the  State  for  the  common  purpose  of  good  government. 
It  will  be  recalled  that  the  principle  of  appointment,  as 
here  advocat  ed,  is  in  practical  operation  in  the  executive 
department  of  the  Federal  government,  where  it  has 
proved  one  of  the  greatest  sources  of  strength  and  ef- 
ficiencv  in  our  national  administration. 

!N'or  will  the  streng-thening  of  the  executive  neces- 
sarily tend  to  the  outcropping  of  autocratic  or  despotic 
methods.  His  election  at  a  direct  primary  will  stamp 
him  as  distinctly  the  representative  and  mouthpiece  of 
the  people,  in  whose  trust  he  acts,  and  to  whom  he  will 
be  directly  responsible.  The  element  of  personal  al- 
legiance or  of  affiliation  with  a  political  combination 
cannot,  under  any  conceivable  circumstances,  become  as 
prominent  as  it  is  now.  The  man  at  the  helm  will  not 
have  had  the  helm  brought  to  him,  but  he  will  have  been 
brought  to  it  He  will  not  be  forced  to  choose  his  help- 
mates with  reference  to  the  wishes  of  a  "machine"  or  a 
"boss"  through  whose  influence  he  has  obtained  his  posi- 
tion, but  will  be  free  to  pick  out  his  men  solely  upon 
the  gi'ound  of  competency,  so  that  credit  may  redound 
to  him  and  to  his  co-workers  for  work  well  done.    There 


440         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Itefornis. 

would  be  harmony  of  action  Lecanse  tlie  subordinates 
would  be  the  choice  of  the  head.  There  would  be  suf- 
ficient control,  because  their  tenure  would  endure  on 
good  behavior. 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  centralization  of  ex- 
ecutive power  in  the  States  through  the  judicious  expan- 
sion of  the  governor's  limited  appointing  power,  could 
in  no  wise  be  fraught  Avith  evil.^  It  would  introduce 
unity  into  a  sadly  decentralized  system,  and  at  the  same 
time  would  greatlv  relieve  the  undue  burden  which  at 
present  rests  upon  the  voter.  Through  the  reduction  of 
the  number  of  state  elective  offices,  together  with  a  sim- 
ilar change  in  the  localities,  tlie  progress  of  the  direct 
primary  would  be  considerably  stimulated,  for  the  ne- 
cessity of  frequent  calls  to  the  polls,  and  the  perplexity 
of  coming  to  a  decision  as  to  the  relative  merits  of  a 
large  number  of  candidates  for  office,  confuses  and  dis- 
gusts the  voter  in  much  the  same  degree  that  it  rrxakes 
the  business  of  caucus  management  intricate,  exacting, 
and  profitable  to  the  manipulator. 

Of  the  same  nature  as  the  spirit  which  asks  for  a  re- 
duction in  the  number  of  elective  offices,  is  that  which 
demands  an  increase  in  their  length  of  terms.  It  seems 
that  any  one  who  will  thoughtfully  study  the  terms  of 
office  of  our  public  servants  in  the  different  political 
units,  cannot  help  bu„  be  struck  by  their  short  duration. 
In  the  localities,  as  well  as  in  the  central  governments, 
extremely  rapid  changes  in  the  personnel  occur.  Annual 
elections  are  common.  In  our  Commonwealths,  annual 
or  biennial  elections  are  frequently  made  to  positions 

'  Bradford,  "  The  Lesson  of  Popular  Government,"  Vol.  11,  ch.  32:  "The  Ex- 
ecutive in  the  State." 


Elective  and  Ajppointlve  Offices.  44:1 

wliicli  no  man  of  ordinary  capacity  can  possibly  learn 
to  fill  Avitli  credit  in  so  brief  a  space  of  time. 

A  good  illustration  of  tlie  brevity  of  the  terms  of 
elective  positions  may  be  gathered  from  the  State  of- 
fices.    In  two  States,  llassachnsetts  and  Ehode  Island, 
new  elections  are  made  every  year.     All,  or  most,  of- 
ficers hold  for  but  two  years  in  Alabama,  Georgia,  Idaho, 
Iowa,  Kansas,  Maine,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Nebraska, 
ISTew  York,  N'orth  Dakota,  Ohio,  South  Carolina,  South 
Dakota,  Texas,  Vermont,  and  Wisconsin.     In  the  re- 
maining States  and  Territories,  including  California, 
Delaware,  Florida,  Illinois,  Kentucky,  Louisiana,  Miss- 
issippi, Missouri,  Montana,   j^evada,   Xorth  Carolina, 
Oregon,  Pennsylvania,    Utah,  Washington,    West  Vir- 
ginia, Wyoming,  Oklahoma,  and  Hawaii,   all  or  most 
offices  are  held  for  four  years.    In  the  local  governments 
the  shortness  of  terms  is  even  much  more  pronounced. 
The  voter  is  kept  busy  attending  numerous  caucuses 
for  the  nomination  of  local  officers  or  for  the  selection 
of  delegates  to  lower  conventions.     He  is  wearied  with 
incessant  calls  to  the  polls,  which  each  succeeding  year 
repeats,  and  is  confused  and  perplexed  with  the  ever- 
lengthening  lists  of  candidates  between  whose  merits 
he  must  decide,  and  to  whom  he  must  confide  the  trust 
of  public  office. 

Like  the  change  from  appointment  to  election,  short 
terms  are  the  result  of  a  reaction  of  democratic  feeling 
against  the  abuse  of  the  trust  of  public  office  by  constant 
recourse  to  the  spoils  theory.  It  is  the  result  of  a  fever- 
ish anxiety  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  maintain  an 
immediate  and  most  stringent  control  over  the  officers 
of  the  government.     Experience  made  this  a  necessity, 


442         Direct  Primary  and  Oilier  Reforms. 

because  of  the  impossibility  which  existed,  at  times, 
through  the  interference  of  politicians,  for  the  voters 
to  elect  the  men  of  their  choice  to  office.  But  after  the 
successful  consummation  of  the  primary  reform,  and  of 
the  civil  service  reform,  this  difficulty  would  no  longer 
be  felt,  and  short  terms  in  elective  offices  would,  -u'ith  a 
few  exceptions,  be  entirely  without  defense.  It  is  not 
enough  to  elect  good  men  to  the  public  service.  They 
must  be  permitted  a  tenure  of  office  of  sufficient  length 
to  enable  them  to  become  thoroughly  familiar  with  their 
duties,  and  to  learn  to  utilize  their  abilities  to  their 
fullest  extent.  Government  is  no  exception  to  the  rule 
that  we  learn  to  do  by  doing,  and  that  we  grow  towards 
perfection  by  practice. 

There  is  at  present  a  tendency  towards  longer  tenures 
in  elective  offices.  Discussions  are  being  engaged  in  re- 
specting the  advisability  of  lengthing  the  term  of  office 
of  the  president,  the  governor,  and  other  state  and  local 
officers.  In  some  States  positive  results  have  already 
been  attained.  Typical  of  the  movement  was  the  ac- 
tion of  the  legislature  of  Wisconsin,  w'hich  on  May  15, 
1901,  passed  an  act  providing  that  in  all  cities  of  the 
second,  third,  and  fourth  class  the  terms  of  all  elective 
offices,  except  for  aldermen  in  cities  governed  by  special 
charter,  are  to  be  at  least  two  years.  The  original  bill 
provided  for  a  complete  scheme  of  biennial  elections  for 
all  cities  of  the  State,  but  opposition  proved  too  strong 
for  its  passage.^ 

An  increase  in  the  length  of  terms  in  elective  offices, 

•  Two  other  bills  were  introduced  into  the  legislature  of  Wisconsin  in  1901, 
having  in  view  the  same  purpose.  One  would  have  made  the  terms  of  all  elect- 
ive offices  within  the  state  biennial,  while  the  other  provided  for  two-year  terms 
for  boards  of  superviisors  and  justices  of  the  peace. 


Elective  and  Appointive  Offices.  443 

besides  easing  the  operation  of  our  nominating  macliin- 
ery,  and  relieving  the  duties  of  the  voter  at  the  polls, 
would  place  an  additional  premium  upon  office.  It 
would  give  the  office-holder  an  opportimitv  to  inaugurate 
his  favorite  policies,  and  to  give  his  ideas  a  fair  test. 
It  would  tend  to  greater  soundness  and  independence  of 
judgment  on  part  of  officials.  If  they  felt  sure  of  their 
groimd,  it  would  often  enable  them  to  defy  a  temporary 
opposition  of  public  sentiment,  only  to  win  their  point 
later  when  results  came  in  crowned  with  success.  A  fair 
test  of  an  official's  capacity  would  be  made,  and  the  pos- 
sibility of  re-election  increased.  All  this  would  insure 
greater  efficiency  in  administration,  and  would  inspire 
an  ever-growing  confidence  in  the  success  of  democratic 
government. 

REFERENCES. 

Bradford,  Gamaliel.    The  Lesson  of  Popular  Government,  Vol. 

II,  oil.  XXIIL    1899. 

Bridgman,  Raymond  S.     Biennial  Elections.   New  England  Maga- 
zine (N.  S.),  Vol.  VIII,  p.  206  (April,  1893). 
Bryce,  James.     American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  II,  eh.  LL     1889. 
Devlin,  Thomas  C.  Municipal  Reform  in  the  United  States.  1896. 
Goodnow,  Frank.   Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  I,  Book 

III,  ch.  IIL     1893. 

Goodnow,  Frank.    Municipal  Problems,  chs.  I  and  VII.     1897. 

SCHOULER,  James.  Constitutional  Studies,  Part  III,  chs.  V,  VI, 
and  VII.    1897. 

Wilcox,  Delos  F.    The  Study  of  City  Government,  ch,  IV.    1897. 

Woodruff,  Clinton  Rogers.  Multiplicity  of  Municipal  Elec- 
tions and  Offices.     Municipality,  May,  1901. 

Editorial,  Biennial  Terms  for  Elective  City  Offices.  Municipality, 
June,  1901. 

Municipal  Reform.   Municipal  Affairs,  Vol.  II,  p.  135.    1898. 


CHAPTEE  III. 

THE    PREVENTION    OF    POLITICAL    CORRUPTION. 

Closely  related  to  the  Australian  ballot  and  the  pri- 
mary election  reforms  safeguarding  our  nominations  and 
elections,  is  that  which  aims  to  punish  the  corrupt  use  of 
money  and  other  forms  of  bribery  in  securing  either 
nominations  or  elections  to  office.  These  reforms  are 
all  complementary.  JSTeither  one  is  complete  in  itself, 
and  all  co-operate  for  a  common  end, — the  establish- 
ment of  more  perfect  institutions  for  the  selection  of  our 
public  service.  By  penalizing  the  use  of  money  for  the 
purchase  or  influence  of  votes,  it  is  hoped  to  prevent 
mercenaries  from  controlling  nominations  and  elections, 
and  to  enable  merit  instead  of  money  to  decide  the  issue 
at  the  "polls. 

What  can  be  done  through  the  enactment  of  thorough 
corrupt  practices  legislation  was  well  illustrated  in  Eng- 
land through  the  enactment  of  the  Sir  Henry  James 
Act  of  1883,  "which  from  the  moment  of  its  application 
abolished  corruption  and  bribery  at  a  single  blow."  ^ 
"Canada,  in  chapters  8,  9,  and  10  of  her  Revised  Stat- 
utes of  1886,  has  admirably  followed  the  English  pre- 
cedent and  with  excellent  results."  In  our  own  country, 
while  encouraging  progress  has  been  made,  much  more 
remains  to  be  done.    In  1895  Professor  Gregory,  in  an 

'  For  a  moot  able  discussion  of  this  subject,  see  "  Political  Corruption  and  Eng- 
lish and  American  Laws  for  its  Prevention,"  by  Charles  Noble  Gregory,  A.  M., 
LTj.  B.,  in  Transactions  of  the  Wisconsin  Academy  of  Sciences,  Arts,  and  Let- 
ters, Vol.  y 


Corrujpt  Practices  Legislation.  445 

aLle  treatise  on  the  subject,  wrote  as  follows  respecting 
our  corrupt  practices  acts :  "The  several  States  of  our 
own  country  have  for  many  years  had  upon  their  statute 
books  formal  and  useless  enactments  against  bribery  in 
elections.  They  simply  denounce  a  penalty  against  the 
offense,  but  make  scant  provision  for  their  ovm  enforce- 
ment, and  call  for  no  publicity  in  election  expenditures 
and  for  no  reports  from  candidates  or  committees.  They 
have  proved  about  as  efficient  as  the  moral  sentiments 
in  a  copy  book  or  a  worsted  motto  on  the  wall." 

The  first  corrupt  practices  act  seems  to  have  been 
passed  in  ISTew  York  in  1890.  More  serious  and  suc- 
cessful attempts  in  the  same  direction  were  made  the 
next  year  in  Colorado  and  Michigan.  In  1892  the  ISTew 
York  law  was  changed,  while  an  act  was  also  placed 
upon  the  statute  books  of  Massachusetts  which  was  said 
to  surpass  all  of  its  predecessors  in  efficiency  and  com- 
pleteness, while  the  New  York  law,  as  it  then  stood, 
seems  to  have  been  the  weakest.^  In  1893  a  gratifying 
advance  was  made  in  Delaware,  Kansas,  California,  and 
Missouri.  So  thorough  and  complete  were  the  Califor- 
nia and  Missouri  acts,^  that  Professor  Gregory  speaks  of 
them  as  approaching  or  even  surpassing  the  Sir  Henry 
James  Act  in  comprehensiveness  and  efficiency.  After 
1893  the  following  States  enacted  or  amended  corrupt 
practices  legislation,  ranging  from  the  most  complete 
type  to  that  which  is  the  very  embodiment  of  imper- 
fection :  In  1894,  New  York,  Massachusetts,  and  Geor- 
gia; in  1895,  Arizona,  Montana,  Minnesota,  Connecti- 
cut, New  York,  Iowa,  and  Pennsylvania;  in  1896,  Utah, 

'  James.  Heniy,  "  British  Corrupt  Practices  Acts,"  Forum,  April,  1893. 
'  The  Missouri  law  was  the  result  of  thorough,  systematic,  but  temperate  agita- 
tion during  the  year  1892  and  prior  to  the  campaign. 


44:6         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

Ohio,  ISTew  Jersey,  New  York,  and  South  Carolina ;  in 
1897,  Wisconsin,  Nevada,  ISTorth  Carolina,  Tennessee, 
California,  Missouri,  Nebraska,  and  Colorado;  in  1898, 
Florida;  in  1899,  California,  Nebraska  and  Nevada;  in 
1900,  Kentucky,  Maryland,  New  York,  Massachusetts, 
and  Ohio.-^  In  some  thirteen  of  these  States  the  acts 
possess  considerable  thoroughness.^  The  Minnesota  law 
closely  follows  the  provisions  contained  in  the  most  ex- 
cellent Missouri  law  of  1893.  The  criticism  passed  re- 
specting corrupt  practices  legislation  in  the  United 
States  in  1895  applies  with  equal  point  at  the  present 
time  outside  of  those  States  which  were  enumerated  as 
possessing  general,  detailed  laws.  None  probably  excels 
the  Missouri  law  of  1893,  which  "is  a  model  from  which 
all  refonn  legislators  must  start  when  they  deal  with 
these  questions." 

The  enactment  of  these  corrupt  practices  acts  was  not 
secured  without  struggles.  Our  state  records  are  full 
of  instances  where  good  bills  were  repeatedly  defeated 
by  successive  legislatures.  But  continued  and  systematic 
agitation  won  in  the  end,  as  it  always  must  when  sup- 
ported by  principles  of  merit  which  appeal  to  the  com- 
mon sense  of  justice  and  worth.  With  the  success  of  the 
past  to  spur  on  reform  legislators  in  this  field,  and  with 
a  growing  interest  in  all  true  reform  among  the  masses 
of  the  people,  we  may  witli  good  reason  look  forward 
to  the  early  enactment  of  efficient  and  comprehensive 
corrupt  practices  acts  in  all  of  those  Commonwealths 
which  have  not  already*  availed  themselves  of  the  bene- 
ficial opcj-ation  of  such  laws.     Such  a  movement  would 

'  The  results  of  the  last  year's  legislation  were  not  ascertained. 
'Michigan,  Colorado,  Massachusetts,  Kansas,  California,  Missouri,    Arizona, 
Montana,  Connecticut,  Minnesota,  Wisconsin,  Nebraska,  and  New  York. 


Corrupt  Practices  Leghlation.  447 

greatly  strengthen  the  cause  of  good  government,  and 
would  considerably  aid  the  progress  of  the  purilfication 
of  the  primary,  thereby  hastening  the  day  when  with 
restored  power  in  their  hands  the  people  shall  vindicate 
themselves,  and  shall  further  prove  their  capacity  suc- 
cessfully to  maintain  republican  institutions. 

REFERENCES. 

Bishop,  J.  B.    Political  Corruption.   The  Price  of  Peace.  Century, 

Vol  26,  p.  667  (September,  189i). 
Bishop,  J.  B.    Insufficient  Restriction  of  Campaign  Expenditures. 

Forum,  Vol.  15,  p.  148  (April,  1893). 
Bonaparte,  Charles  J.  Political  Corruption  in  Maryland.  Forum, 

Vol  XIII,  p.  1  (March,  1893). 
BURTOX,  S.  C.    The  Corrupt  Practices  Bill  of  1881.    Contemporary 

Review,  Vol.  39.  p.  758  (May,  1881). 
George,  Henry.    Money  in  Elections.    North  American  Review, 

Vol.  136,  p.  201  (March,  1883). 
GODKIN,  E.  L.     Money  in  Elections.     Nation,  Vol.  55,  p.  274  (Octo- 
ber, 1892). 
Gregory,  Charles  Noble.    Political  Corruption  and  English  and 

American  Laws  for  its  Prevention.     In  Transactions  of  the 

Wisconsin  Academy  of  Sciences,  Arts,  and  Letters,  Vol.  X. 

1895. 
Gregory,  Charles  Noble.    The  Corrupt  Use  of  Money  in  Politics 

and  Laws  for  its  Prevention.     1893. 
James,  Henry.    British  Corrupt  Practices  Acts.    Forum,  Vol.  15» 

p.  129  (April,  1893). 
QuiNCEY,  John,    The    Massachusetts    Corrupt    Practices    Acts. 

Forum,  Vol  15,  p.  142  (March,  1893). 
Rice,  A.  T,    Political   Corruption,   the  Reform  of  the  Present. 

North  American  Review,  Vol.  148,  p.  83  (January,  1889). 
"Welsh,  H.  J.  Publicity  as  a  Cure  for  Political  Corruption.  Forum, 

Vol.  14,  p.  26  (September,  1892). 
White,  H.    Money  in  Elections.  Nation,  Vol  39,  p.  303  (October  9, 

1884). 
Editorial,  Federal  Corrupt  Practices  Act.    Nation,  Vol  70,  p.  84 

(JNIarch,  1900). 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  POPULAR  ELECTION  OP  UNITED  STATES 

SENATORS. 

In  gathering  togetlier  tlie  stronger  forces  of  reform 
operating  in  the  fiekl  of  pDlitics  at  the  present  time,  it 
is  necessary  to  take  into  consideration  that  other  popular 
movement  of  great  significance, — the  election  of  United 
States  senators  by  the  people.  It  is  believed  by  some 
political  thinkers  that  the  application  of  the  principle  of 
a  direct  vote  to  tlie  nomination  of  members  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  would  ultimately  also  lead  to  the 
jwpular  election  of  United  States  senators,  thereby  re- 
moving a  fruitful  source  of  corruption  and  dissension  in 
our  state  legislatures.  It  is  also  believed  by  many,  it 
appears,  that  this  change  would  not  occur  without  the 
institution  of  a  direct  vote  system.  "Until  the  people 
adopt  the  method  of  the  direct  nomination  of  represent- 
atives, there  will  never  be  an  election  of  a  United  States 
senator  by  the  i3eople.  Once  let  them  have  the  permis- 
sion of  the  politician  to  nominate  their  own  representa- 
tives, and  they  will  elect  men  in  touch  with  them,  who 
will  cause  to  be  submitted  to  their  constituents  for  adop- 
tion a  constitutional  amendment,  authorizing  the  elec- 
tion of  United  States  senators  by  the  people."  ^ 

In  the  southern  States  sentiment  seems  to  be  drifting 
towards  the  informal  nomination  of  United  States  sen- 

>  John  S.  Hopkins  in  Arena.  Vol.  19,  p.  737  (June,  I8C81.  As  will  be  seen  presently, 
the  House  of  Representatives  is  not  the  most  serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of  such 
a  change. 


Senatoi'ial  Elections  hy  Pojmlar  Vote.        449 

ators  at  the  primaries.  A  large  state  convention  which 
met  in  Virginia  several  years  ago  demanded  that  the 
Democratic  candidate  for  United  States  senator  should 
he  nominated  by  the  "disinterested  voters  at  the  pri- 
maries, instead  of  by  the  politicians  of  the  legislature," 
while  during  the  last  year  their  nomination  at  the  pri- 
maries together  with  other  officers,  was  demanded  in  the 
state  platform,  and  the  party  committee  directed  to  draw 
up  a  scheme  for  their  choice  by  direct  vote.  In  Miss- 
issippi some  thirty-eight  counties  ordered  the  primaries 
to  give  instructions  in  regard  to  United  States  senator- 
ships.^  In  Arkansas  nominations  to  the  senate  have 
been  made  at  primaries  since  the  enactment  of  the  pri- 
marv  election  law  of  1895.  The  same  svstem  was  also 
adopted  in  l^orth  Carolina  at  the  primary  elections  held 
in  the  fall  of  1900,  and  was  incorporated  in  the  original 
direct  primary  bill  of  Oregon  for  1901.  Undoubtedly, 
such  an  expression  of  popular  opinion  respecting  a  can- 
didate, while  but  indirectly  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
legislatures,  must  operate  as  a  most  powerful  influence 
in  preventing  politicians  from  dominating  these  bodies 
in  the  election  of  United  States  senators. 

The  idea  of  the  popular  election  of  United  States  sena- 
tors has  been  much  commented  upon  of  late,  and  is  being 
received  wi\h.  considerable  favor.  There  is  no  good 
reason  for  believing  that  such  an  arrangement  would  not 
be  more  successful  than  the  present  one,  considering 
the  conditions  which  obtain  in  the  election  by  our  leg- 
islatures, yet  it  is  to  be  doubted  whether  direct  primaries 
will  aid  in  bringing  about  this  change.  Rather  does  it 
seem  that  they  would  remove  the  necessity  of  a  change. 

'  Progress  of  Direct  Primaries  in  the  South,  Outlook,  June  3, 1899,  p.  243. 
29 


450         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms, 

The  popular  election  of  senators  is  urged  to-daj  because 
"machine-controlled"  or  corrupted  legislatures  fre- 
quently send  men  to  Washington  who  are  incompetent, 
unscrupulous,  and  entirely  unworthy  of  a  seat  in  the 
national  senate.  Who  were  the  senatorial  products  of 
ISTew  York  when  the  Piatt  and  Hill  "machines"  con- 
trolled the  legislatures  of  that  State  ?  Who  represented 
Pennsylvania  in  the  United  States  senate  when  Cameron 
was  the  idol  of  the  politicians,  or  when  the  Quay  "ma- 
cliine"  dominated  Pennsylvania  politics?  The  senate 
is  truly  the  quintessence  of  the  state  legislatures.  When 
the  latter  are  corrupt,  the  former  cannot  be  pure. 
Cleanse  the  one,  and  you  cleanse  the  other.  Improve 
the  state  legislatures  by  dislodging  "machine"  politi- 
cians, and  you  improve  the  character  of  the  senators 
who  are  chosen  by  these  legislatures.  A  direct  vote  sys- 
tem, by  making  each  legislator  directly  responsible  to 
his  constituents,  would  undoubtedly  do  away  with  many 
of  the  disgi'aceful  senatorial  election  scandals,  and  w^ould 
I'emove  the  source  of  the  many  tales  of  corruption  which 
now  issue  from  our  legislative  halls,  so  that  there  would 
no  longer  be  the  demand  for  a  popularization  of  our 
senatorial  elections. 

]\Ioreover,  in  order  to  secure  the  election  of  United 
States  senators  by  a  popular  vote,  it  would  also  be  neces- 
sary to  amend  the  Constitution.  At  present  such  a 
change  would  be  a  very  remote  possibility,  since  it  could 
not  be  accomplished  without  the  acceptance  of  the 
amendment  by  the  senate  itself,  as  well  as  by  three- 
fourths  of  the  state  legislatures.^     The  other  alternative 

•  Bradford,  Lesson  of  Popular  Government,  Vol.  II,  p.  44.  In  May,  1898,  the 
House  of  Representatives  passed  by  a  vote  of  184  to  11  an  amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution to  this  elfect,  but  the  senate  paid  no  attention  whatever  to  it. 


Senatorial  Elections  hy  Pojnolar  Vote.        451 

of  a  constitutional  convention  which  would  place  at  risk 
every  precept  upon  which  the  Constitution  is  based,  is 
not  to  be  contemplated  without  a  shudder.  It  is  not  at 
all  certain  that  such  a  change  is  desirable,  and  that  it 
might  not  be  fraught  with  unforeseen  disaster.  Far  bet- 
ter would  it  probably  be  for  us  to  purify  our  legisla- 
tures, and  then  proceed  under  our  Constitution  as  it 
stands  to-day. 

REFERENCES, 

Clark,  Walter.    Popular  Election  of  United  States  Senators. 

Arena,  Vol.  X,  p.  453  (September,  1894). 
Edmunds,  G.  F.    Popular  Election  of  United  States  Senators. 

Forum,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  270  (November,  1894). 
Flagg,  John  H.    Popular  Election  of  United  States  Senators. 

New  England  Magazine,  N.  s..  Vol.  XIV,  p.  190  (April,  1896). 
Garrison,  W.  P.    Popular  Election  of  United  States  Senators. 

Nation,  Vol.  LIV,  p.  44  (January  22,  1892). 
Haynes,    John.     Popular  Election  of  United    States    Senators. 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies,  Vol.  II,  p.  547  (November, 

1893). 
Mitchell,  J.  H.    Popular  Election  of  United  States  Senators. 

Arena,  Vol.  X,  p.  453  (September,  1894). 
Editorial,    Money  and   Senatorships.    Nation,  Vol.  LXX,  p.  295 

(April,  1900). 
Senatorial  Elections.    Public  Opinion,  Vol.  XXIX,  p.  516, 

(April  26, 1900). 
Senators  and  Appointments.    Public  Opinion,  Vol.  XXIX, 


p.  776  (June  31, 1900). 


CHAPTEK  y. 

THE  REFERENDUM   IN  AMERICA. 

It  is  proposed  briefly  to  point  out  the  relation  existing 
between  the  movement  towards  direct  legislation  and 
that  having  in  view  direct  primaries.  It  is  necessary 
at  the  outset  to  define  the  tenns,  "direct  legislation," 
"initiative,"  and  "referendum,"  which  are  of  funda- 
mental importance  in  this  discussion.  Under  the  "in- 
itiative," one  or  more  citizens  have  the  right  to  originate 
bills,  which,  upon  submission  to  the  popular  vote  by 
petition  of  a  certain  percentage  of  the  voters,  become 
laws,  if  supported  by  a  majority  of  the  whole  number  of 
votes  cast.  Bv  the  ''referendum"  is  meant  the  right  of 
the  people  to  vote  upon  a  law  proposed  through  the  initi- 
ative, or  by  a  law-making  body,  and  submitted  to  them 
by  petition  of  a  percentage  of  voters.  The  expression 
"direct  legislation"  includes  both  the  initiative  and  the 
referendum,  and  may  hence  be  defined  in  general  terms 
as  law-making  by  the  voters,  although  in  effect  it  oper- 
ates as  a  check  or  veto  upon  legislation. 

The  close  relation  which  exists  between  the  principle 
of  the  direct  primary  and  that  of  direct  legislation  is 
apparent.  They  spring  from  a  common  source,  and  their 
operation  takes  government  back  towards  a  pure  democ- 
racy. Both  reforms  find  their  origin  in  a  common 
cause — dissatisfaction  with  government.  Both  are  in- 
spired by  faith  in  the  judgment  of  the  plain  citizen. 
Both  propose  one  remedy — the  restoration  of  lost  power 


The  Referendum  in  Araerica.  453 

to  tlie  people.  But  they  hope  to  accoraplisli  this  by  dif- 
ferent methods.  The  central  idea  of  primary  reform 
is  that  good  government  depends  upon  good  officers, 
who  will  not  only  make  good  laws  but  will  faithfully 
execute  them,  while  the  idea  of  the  initiative  and  refer- 
endum is  that  good  government  depends  upon  good 
laws.  But  good  legislation  is  not  sufficient;  there  still 
remains  its  proper  interpretation  and  its  faithful  ad- 
ministration. Wo  need  not  only  good  laws,  but  also 
good  men  to  execute  these  laws.  One  branch  of  govern- 
ment would  be  cleansed  by  the  application  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  direct  legislation,  but  the  purification  of  the 
other  departments  does  not  necessarily  follow.  Though 
this  difference  in  the  scope  and  effect  of  these  two  re- 
forms exists,  both  concern  themselves  with  the  improve- 
ment of  government  through  the  restoration  of  its  demo- 
cratic character,  so  that  the  progress  of  direct  primaries 
would  influence  that  of  direct  legislation,  and  vice  versa, 
the  adoption  of  one  rendering  the  other  in  large  measure 
unnecessary. 

The  principle  of  the  referendum  has  already  attained 
considerable  prominence  in  this  country,  and  is  fast  be- 
ing given  a  wider  application.  Hence,  a  brief  review 
of  the  present  status  of  direct  legislation,  and  an  esti- 
mation of  its  future,  is  not  only  germane  to  the  subject 
of  primary  reform,  but  is  indispensable  in  drawing  a 
complete  picture  of  the  main  forces  of  reform  operating 
in  the  field  of  politics. 

The  idea  of  direct  legislation  long  ago  found  fruitful 
soil  in  this  country,  and  has  since  been  growing  steadily. 
The  referendum  is  at  present  in  general  use,  and  is  likely 
soon  to  be  even  more  widely  employed,  particularly  in 


454         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

the  western  States  where  changes  are  easily  and  rapidly 
effected.^  In  South  Dakota,  it  was  adopted  some  time  ago 
through  a  constitutional  amendment,  and  similar  changes 
are  pending  in  Oregon,  Utah,  and  other  western  States. 
The  principle  has  already  been  introduced  into  our  state 
governments  through  the  Constitutions.  In  fifteen 
States,  the  location  of  the  capital  cannot  be  changed  by 
act  of  the  legislature,  but  must  go  to  the  people  directly. 
In  eleven  States,  no  debts  can  be  incurred,  except  such 
as  are  provided  for  specifically  in  the  several  Constitu- 
tions ;  in  many  States  "no  rate  of  assessment  exceeding 
a  figure  proportionate  to  the  aggi^egate  valuation  of  the 
taxable  property"  can  be  imposed  without  the  consent 
of  the  people  by  direct  vote.^  We  have  the  principle  of 
the  referendum  in  the  submission  of  Constitutions  and 
constitutional  amendments  to  the  people. 

In  our  localities,  subjects  of  the  greatest  variety  are 
submitted  to  a  popular  vote  in  cities,  counties,  towns,  and 
other  local  districts.  There  is  not  a  State  in  the  Union 
in  which  the  legislature  does  not  submit  questions  per- 
taining to  local  government  to  the  people.  City  char- 
ters, local  government  acts,  and  bills  affecting  the  form 
and  character  of  the  local  governments ;  loan  bills,  finan- 
cial proposals,  taxation  measures ;  prohibition,  higher  li- 
cense, enclosing  of  domestic  animals, — these  are  gener- 
ally the  subjects  of  Leal  referenda.* 

'  Oberholtzer,  E.  P.,  Direct  Legislation,  Arena,  November,  1900,  p.  493. 

«  Brown,  A.  A.,  Direct  Legislation,  Arena,  July,  1899,  p.  97. 

*  Direct  legislation  has  been  adopted  into  municipal  charters  in  a  complete 
form  in  San  Francisco,  Vallejo,  and  Seattle,  and  in  partial  form  in  many  other 
cities,  but  pai  Jcularly  in  St.  Paul,  Detroit,  and  Nashville,  where  no  municipal 
franchises  can  be  given  away  by  the  common  council  without  a  vote  by  the 
people.  In  Massachusetts  the  liquor  question  is  also  yearly  submitted  to  a  pop- 
ular vote  in  the  cities. 


The  Referendum  in  America.  455 

Of  late,  the  movement  towards  an  extension  of  the 
referendum  has  been  rapidly  strengthening.  More  than 
three  thousand  newspapers  and  magazines  are  advocat- 
ing it  as  a  reform  of  primary  importance.  In  1899 
thirty-eight  state  platforms  contained  planks  favoring 
direct  legislation,  while  in  1900  the  national  platforms 
of  the  Democratic  party,  the  People's  party,  the  Middle- 
of-the-Road  Populists,  and  the  Social  Democratic  party 
embodied  initiative  and  referendum  planks.  Ober- 
holtzer,  one  of  the  most  thorough  students  of  this  re- 
form, declares  that  while  the  general  advisability  of  the 
referendum  is  still  an  "open  question,"  it  will  undoubt- 
edly soon  be  even  more  widely  employed  in  this  country. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  it  will  be  of  interest,  as  well 
as  of  importance,  briefly  to  view  the  main  advantages 
and  disadvantages  of  direct  legislation.  Switzerland 
has  been  the  Mecca  of  experience,  and  there  the  results 
were  generally  favorable.  In  other  countries  it  has  found 
but  a  limited  application,  so  that  little  weight  can  be 
placed  upon  the  practical  results.  In  l^orway,  England, 
Canada,  France,  Belgium,  Holland,  Germany,  Austria, 
Russia,^  and  even  Italy  and  Spain,  local  referenda  are 
common,  and,  in  some  cases,  rapidly  increasing.  In 
New  Zealand  there  are  triennial  referenda  on  the  liquor 
and  land  tax  questions,  while  an  influential  and  growing 
party  exists  in  Australia  which  favors  its  complete  ex- 
tension to  all  the  affairs  of  the  colony.  From  this  compar- 
atively limited  field  of  experience,  the  main  arguments 
for  and  against  the  referendum  are  drawn.  In  the 
brief  summary  of  both  sides  of  the  problem  which  will 

» In  Russia  it  is  used  in  the  local  political  units,  the  mir  and  artel,  where  the 
people  themselves  vote  on  the  communal  division  of  the  land  and  taxes. 


456         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

be  presented  here,  sucli  additional  advantages  and  dis- 
advantages will  be  included  as  would  probably  demon- 
strate themselves  should  the  referendum  be  adopted  on 
a  more  extended  scale  in  this  country. 

Among  the  chief  advantages  of  the  referendum  are 
the  following: 

It  destroys  the  power  of  the  legislator  to  legislate 
for  personal  ends,  and  makes  him  directly  responsible 
to  his  constituents. 

It  deprives  corporations,  lobbyists,  and  corrupt  poli- 
ticians of  the  power  to  secure  the  enactment  of  special 
laws. 

It  defeats  monopolies,  improves  the  method  of  taxa- 
tion, reduces  the  rate,  and  avoids  national  scandals  grow- 
ing out  of  extravagance. 

It  arouses  a  wide  interest  in  matters  of  public  con- 
cern, and  educates  the  people  upon  public  questions  and 
in  practical  politics. 

It  reduces  the  tendencies  of  revolution  or  radical  re- 
foiTU,  and  prevents  sudden  explosions  of  public  opinion 
by  permitting  the  people  from  time  to  time  to  incorpo- 
rate their  ideas  of  change  in  legislation. 

It  strikes  a  mean  in  progress  between  the  radical  and 
the  conservative.  While  the  people  may  be  impulsive 
at  times,  it  is  claimed  that  they  will  be  less  so  than  legis- 
lative bodies,  which  every  now  and  then  are  swept  by 
gusts  of  passion  and  folly. 

It  will  give  voice  and  influence  to  the  great  mass  of 
home-loving,  peaceable,  industrious  people,  who  make 
little  agitation,  and  are  not  heard  in  the  ordinary  clamor 
of  politics,  but  who  are  fair-minded  and  love  justice. 

It  will  eliminate  all  forms  of  corruption,  and  do  away 


The  Referendum  in  America.  457 

with  special  legislation  which  today  is  breeding  false 
fortunes  for  the  boodlers,  monopolists,  and  corporation 
agents. 

It  will  replace  party  government  with  government 
by  the  people  through  the  destruction  of  political  parties. 
An  active  and  continuous  party  organization  would  be 
superfluous.  Independent  judgment  would  be  encour- 
aged, and  all  waste  of  time  and  money  incident  to  the 
maintenance  of  a  healthy  party  organization  would  be 
obviated. 

It  will  lead  to  the  incorporation  in  legislation  of  the 
idea  that  only  those  people  who  are  concerned  with  and 
affected  by  a  law  shall  vote  upon  it,  thereby  tending 
toward  a  decentralization  of  power,  and  the  proper  re- 
distribution of  governmental  functions  between  the 
town,  ward,  city,  county,  State,  and  Nation. 

So  much  for  the  advantages  of  direct  legislation,  which, 
it  must  be  admitted,  present  numerous  and  encouraging 
aspects.  Against  the  referendum  there  are  arrayed  the 
following  arguments : 

It  is  cumbersome,  and  requires  machinery  of  the  State 
to  be  brought  into  action  for  purposes  for  which  it  is  not 
well  adapted. 

It  is  expensive.  The  outlay,  including  an  immense 
amount  of  printing,  ballots,  voting-booths,  pay  of  judges, 
inspectors,  clerks,  and  the  time  spent  by  voters  at  numer- 
ous elections  would  be  considerable. 

In  a  large  and  rapidly  developing  country,  such  as 
the  United  States,  with  an  ever-increasing  demand  for 
legislation,  it  would  be  necessary  to  hold  numerous  elec- 
tions, or  to  submit  so  large  a  number  of  bills  at  one  time 
as  to  confuse  the  voter  as  to  their  nature  and  merits,  and 
thus  make  his  judgment  worth  but  little. 


458         Direct  Primary  and  Oilier  Reforms. 

It  is  impossible  for  the  voter  to  familiarize  himself 
sufficiently  with  the  bills  to  enable  him  to  pass  intelligent 
judgment,  for,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  many  able  and  dili- 
gent legislators  whose  entire  time  and  energy  are  spent 
in  studying  legislation,  frankly  declare  themselves  un- 
familiar with  many  of  the  bills  which  annually  pass  our 
legislatures.* 

It  is  uninteresting  on  the  part  of  the  plain  people  to 
study  difficult  laws.  One  of  the  striking  results  of  exper- 
ience with  local  referenda  in  the  United  States,  was  the 
strange  apathy  and  indifference  of  the  people  respecting 
measures  even  of  great  importance.^  It  may  be  said  in 
mitigation  of  this  argument,  that  the  vote  of  the  inter- 
ested voter  who  is  posted,  need  never  be  feared. 

The  people  may  be  tyrannical.  Populous  portions  of 
the  country  may  legislate  in  their  own  interests  to  the 
detriment  of  sparsely  populated  sections,  particularly  in 
the  matter  of  public  improvements.  However,  since  the 
masses  of  the  people  are  undoubtedly  swayed  by  the 
larger  ideas  of  justice,  and  since  through  the  decentral- 
ization of  power  there  would  result  a  proper  redistribu- 
tion of  local  governmental  functions,  this  difficulty 
would  ultimately  solve  itself.^ 

Important  or  specially  interesting  bills  would  tend 
to  overshadow  all  else  at  an  election,  and  would  make 
the  question  of  good  candidates  secondary. 

The  average  voter  can  pass  more  intelligently  upon 
the  qualifications  of  legislators  than  he  can  upon  the 


'  Maxey,  Edwin,  The  Referendum  in  America,  Arena,  July,  1900,  p.  50. 
'Oberholtzti-,  Ellis  P.,  Direct  Legislation,  Arena,  November,  1900,  p.  493. 
'Pomeroy,  Eltweed,  Direct  Legislation,  Arena,  July,  1899,  p.  105. 


The  Referendum  in  America.  459 

merits  of  laws.  The  masses  of  the  people  study  biogra- 
phy more  carefully  than  they  study  political  science.^ 
The  legislator  would  tend  to  become  a  mere  drafting 
committee  of  legislation,  robl)ed  of  most  of  the  independ- 
ence, imix>rtance,  and  dignity  which  i'u  now  possesses. 
Good  men  would  be  less  apt  to  aspire  to  a  seat  in  that 
body. 

"The  power  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  State  in  con- 
trolling legislation  would  be  gi'eatly  weakened,  for  few 
courts,  especially  where  the  judges  were  elected,  would 
declare  a  law  unconstitutional  after  it  had  once  received 
the  direct  sanction  of  the  people. 

"It  would  cheapen  Constitutions ;  for  ordinary  legis- 
lation having  an  equal  sanction  with  the  Constitution, 
the  tendency  would  be  to  consider  all  laws  bearing  the 
seal  of  the  people  as  constitutional;  hence  there  would 
be  no  permanent  Constitution  at  all."  ^ 

Such  an  elimination  of  all  distinction  between  consti- 
tutional and  ordinary  law  would  probably  be  fraught 
with  grave  consequences.  Our  constitutional  law,  with 
its  fundamental,  sacred,  and  enduring  properties,  would 
lose  its  power.  The  control  of  the  courts  over  legisla- 
tion would  be  removed.  "With  the  destruction  of  this 
keystone  of  our  government, — the  Constitution, — the 
checks  and  balances  of  our  system  would  crumble,  and 
the  spirit  of  our  institutions  would  be  radically 
changed." 

Moreover,  the  institution  of  the  initiative  and  refer- 
endum would  have  a  most  profound  effect  upon  the  prin- 
ciple of  party  government  which  is  at  present  so  thor- 
oughly ingrained  in  our  political  system.     "Although 

1  Maxey,  Edwin,  The  Referendum  in  America,  Arena,  July,  1000,  p.  50.       » Ibid. 


4G0         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

parties  have  never  ceased  to  exist  in  Switzerland,  the 
government  of  the  Confederation,  unlike  that  of  every 
other  democracy,  is  not  in  any  sense  a  government  by 
party."  ^  There  is  an  entire  absence  of  party  ma- 
chinery, as  well  as  of  national  leaders,  while  the  t^end- 
ency  has  been  towards  the  maintenance  of  the  dominant 
party  in  power. 

These  peculiar  conditions  of  the  parties  are  not  en- 
tirely, though  largely,  due  to  the  referendum,  under 
which  it  was  found  that  the  people  do  not  gener- 
ally vote  along  party  lines.  It  also  reduces  the  import- 
ance of  parties  by  tending  to  split  up  political  issues ;  by 
drawing  attention  to  measures  instead  of  to  men;  by 
weakening  the  motives  for  a  change  of  party ;  and  by  per- 
mitting the  people  to  reject  laws  which  are  dissatisfac- 
tory rather  than  replace  the  party  in  power.  Since  final 
judgment  as  to  legislation  is  always  reserved  to  the 
people,  there  is  absent  the  incentive  to  outcries  against 
the  action  of  legislators.  For  all  these  reasons  party  or- 
ganizations have  largely  lost  their  significance  and  their 
importance  in  Switzerland. 

It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that  when  we  come  to  con- 
sider the  advisability  of  introducing  the  referendum 
into  this  country,  numerous  and  grave  objections  pre- 
sent themselves.  While  results  have  been  generally  fa- 
vorable to  Switzerland,  that  country  is  no  safe  criterion 
by  which  to  judge  the  referendum  in  America.  The 
social,  industrial,  and  political  conditions  are  very  dis- 
similar in  these  two  countries.  In  Switzerland  the  pop- 
ulation is  small  and  almost  stationary.  Individual  rec- 
ords are  matters  of  general  knowledge.    Men  know  each 

J  Lowell,  A.  L.,  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  Vol.  II,  p.  297. 


The  Referendum  in  America.  461 

other  from  Loyhood  up.  Public  opinion  is  strong.  De- 
velopment, already  high,  proceeds  evenly  and  slowly. 
In  government,  there  is  no  separation  of  powers,  but  the 
administrative  and  judicial  departments  are  subordinate 
to  the  legislature,  and  through  the  referendum,  hence, 
directly  under  the  control  of  the  people. 

All  this  is  the  reverse  from  conditions  in  the  United 
States.  The  population  consists  of  rapidly  swelling  mil- 
lions, and  is  spread  over  a  wide  extent  of  territory.  It 
is  movable  and  in  a  continuous  state  of  fluctuation. 
Steady  streams  of  immigrants  arrive  at  our  shores  an- 
nually, and  flow  from  State  to  State.  Public  opinion  is- 
vacillating,  and  pulses  with  the  localities.  Development 
in  every  field  of  activity  is  phenomenal.  Each  succeed- 
ing sun  sets  upon  astounding  changes.  Each  year  revo- 
lutionizes conditions.  The  legislative  needs  of  such  a 
State  are  endless.  Laws  cannot  wait  for  the  plodding, 
busy  citizen.  The  legislative  business  of  society  is  too 
big  to  be  conducted  by  the  people.  "In  some  Swiss  can- 
tons not  more  than  five  laws  per  year  are  submitted  for 
a  vote,  while  in  none  does  the  number  average  ten.  In 
our  own  country  "they  often  run  up  into  the  hundreds,, 
and  fill  a  volume  so  large  that  the  voter  would  hardly 
have  time  to  read  it  through  if  he  sacrificed  all  his  leis- 
ure for  the  purpose."  ^  An  active,  representative  legisla- 
ture is  indispensable  to-day  to  deal  with  the  enormous 
mass  of  legislation  which  the  rapid  development  of  the 
IsTation  demands.  And  such  a  legislature  will  be  ob- 
tained through  the  further  prosecution  of  other  reforms 
which  are  already  well  under  way. 

Moreover,  there  is  not  the  same  need  of  a  referendum. 

'  Lowell,  A.  L.,  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  Vol.  n,  p.  298.. 


4G2         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

here  tliat  there  is  in  Switzerland.  The  Swiss  have  no 
executive  veto,  as  a  rule  no  judicial  process  for  setting 
aside  unconstitutional  laws,  and  in  their  cantons  only  a 
single  legislative  chamber.  Hence,  they  are  much  more 
exposed  to  the  danger  of  hasty  law-making,  and  have  a 
greater  need  of  a  veto  in  the  hands  of  the  people. 

From  this  nature  of  the  Swiss  govemm.ent,  it  also  fol- 
lows that  the  referendum,  if  instituted  in  the  United 
States,  could  not  be  as  complete  a  reform  as  it  is  in 
Switzerland.  There  the  legislature,  and  through  the 
referendum,  the  people,  are  the  supreme  body.  The 
proper  administration  of  good  legislation  can  be  forced 
upon  the  administrative  officers,  since  they  are  subsei-v- 
ient,  not  to  a  separate  executive,  but  to  the  legislature. 
In  the  United  States,  the  presence  of  discord  between 
the  executive  and  legislative  departments,  neither  being 
subordinate  to  the  other,  might  practically  nullify  legis- 
lation. It  is  true,  that  generally  through  the  principle 
of  party  responsibility  and  party  co-operation,  harmony 
bet^veen  these  two  departments  would  probably  exist. 
But  it  must  be  remembered  that  our  parties  would  not 
occupy  the  relatively  clearly  defined  and  important  po- 
sitions which  they  do  at  the  present  time,  so  that  the 
theory  of  party  responsibility  would  be  considerably 
clouded  and  confusing  in  its  application.  The  tendency 
of  the  people  not  to  vote  in  strict  party  lines,  which  was 
so  strongly  emphasized  in  Switzerland,  would  blur  party 
distinctions,  and  would  make  it  extremely  difficult  to 
determine  what  jwsitions  the  various  parties  took  re- 
pecting  eacli  particular  law,  thereby  destroying  the 
power  of  holding  the  administrative  officers  accountable 
upon  the  basis  of  party  responsibility. 


The  Referendum  in  America.  463 

For  these  many  reasons  it  would  therefore  seem  that 
while  the  referendum  is  already  in  very  common  use  in 
the  localities,  and  to  some  extent  also  in  our  state  govern- 
ments, it  is  not  at  all  jDrobable  that  it  will  ever  replace 
our  legislatures  as  it  does  in  Switzerland.  It  certainly 
deserves  to  retain  its  very  important  position  among  our 
political  institutions,  and  will  undoubtedly  become  of 
ever-increasing  importance,  especially  in  the  localities. 
But  in  a  fast-developing  country,  where  the  legal  needs 
of  life  make  an  active,  progressive  legislature  indispens- 
able, it  must  inevitably  retain  its  place  as  an  auxiliary 
method  of  legislation,  rather  than  as  the  supreme  source 
of  law  itself. 

REFERENCES. 

Brown,  A.  A.  Direct  Legislation.  Arena,  Vol.  XXII,  p.  96  (July, 
1899). 

Commons,  John  R.  Direct  Legislation  in  Switzerland  and  Amer- 
ica.    Arena,  Vol.  XXII,  p.  735  (December,  1899). 

Deploige,  Simon.     The  Referendum  in  Switzerland.     1899. 

Lowell,  A.  L.  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental  Europe, 
Vol.  II,  chs.  XII  and  XIIL     1897. 

Maxey,  Edwin.  The  Referendum  in  America.  Arena,  Vol.  XXIV, 
p.  47  (July,  1900). 

McCracken,  W.  D.    Swiss  Solution  of  American  Problems.   1894 

Oberholtzer,  Ellis  P.    The  Referendum  in  America.     1898. 

Oberholtzer,  Ellis  P.  Direct  Legislation  in  America.  Arena, 
Vol.  XXIV,  p.  493  (November,  1900). 

POMEROY,  Eltweed.  Direct  Legislation.  Arena,  Vol  XXII,  p.  101 
(July,  1899). 

Pomeroy,  Eltweed.     By  The  People. 

Sullivan.    Direct  Legislation.    1893. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    PROGRAM    OF    REFORM. 

We  may  now  briefly  scan  another  kindred  reform — 
that  of  proportional  representation.  Like  the  referen- 
dum, it  has  as  its  objective  point  the  improvement  of  all 
the  departments  of  government  through  the  purification 
of  its  most  important  branch — the  legislature.  It  is  the 
inefficiency  of  the  legislature, — the  weak  point  in  demo- 
cratic government, — which  is  to  be  overcome.  The  advo- 
cate of  proportional  representation  believes  that  where 
all  political  parties  are  represented  on  the  basis  of  their 
strength ;  where  every  form  of  public  opinion  and  every 
idea  of  public  policy  possesses  an  equal  opportunity  with 
every  other,  to  be  made  known,  and  defended,  and  rep- 
resented  officially  in  the  legislature,  that  this  body  will 
be  made  so  thoroughly  representative  of  all  the  deeper 
shades  of  common  thought  in  society  as  to  solve  the  dif- 
ficulty of  inefficiency  in  government. 

Typical  of  the  claims  that  are  made  for  this  reform 
may  be  taken  the  statement  of  one  of  its  most  enthusi- 
astic advocates.  Professor  John  R.  Commons.^  "The 
gerrymander  becomes  inconceivable,  because  a  vote 
wherever  cast  will  count.  Mathematical  justice  between 
political  parties  is  assured.  Legislative  bodies  will  be 
transformed  from  inefficient  and  corrupt  bands  of  spoils- 
men, into  capable,  upright,  and  representative  assemblies 
of  law-malvcrs.    The  power  of  the  'machine,'  the  'boss/ 

*  Proportional  Representation  Review,  September,  1803. 


The  Program  of  Reform.  465 

and  the  lobby  would  be  broken.  Bribery  would  be  ren- 
dered fruitless,  and  rcj)resentative  government  would 
become  what  it  has  been  in  name  only,  free." 

Grant  that  all  this  would  follow,  is  not  the  real  ques- 
tion at  the  present  moment,  how  shall  we  get  representa- 
tion of  any  kind?  The  fundamental  law  of  the  land 
gives  us  a  right  to  representation  which  we  are  by  no 
means  permitted  to  enjoy  to-day.  It  would  be  absurd 
to  try  for  minority  representation  when  Ave  have  not  yet 
succeeded  in  getting  an  expression  of  the  will  of  the  ma- 
jority. "We  have  a  sham  representation.  It  gives  a 
show  of  fairness,  but  it  is  crude  and  essentially  unfair. 
It  does  not  represent  the  people.  It  represents  the  poli- 
tician. We  are  a  law-abiding  people,  yet  our  laws  are 
made  by  a  minority  of  the  people,  and  by  an  irrespons- 
ible oligarchy  more  dangerous  than  that  our  fathers  re- 
volted against."^  j^ow  if  we  have  a  "sham  representa- 
tion" to-day,  where  we  have  a  right  to  true  representa- 
tion, it  seems  ridiculous  to  extend  the  right  of  "sham 
representation"  to  tlie  minorities.  If  the  members  of 
the  successful  party  are  not  properly  represented  now, 
why  add  to  the  farce  by  extending  an  empty  right  to  the 
weaker  parties  ?  Does  this  not  seem  like  reform  at- 
tempted at  the  wrong  end  ?  First  let  us  restore  to  our- 
selves the  full  power  of  the  right  to  representation  which 
we  now  possess,  but  do  not  enjoy,  then  it  would  not  only 
be  easy,  but  effective,  if  found  advisable,  to  inaugurate 
a  system  of  proportional  representation. 

As  already  suggested,  the  referendum,  as  well  as  pro- 
portional representation,  incorporate  the  idea  of  arriv- 
ing at  a  good  government  by  purifying  the  legislature. 

1  Commons,  John  R.,  in  Proportional  Representation  Review,  September,  1893. 


4c6G         Direct  Pi'imm^y  and  Other  Reforms. 

The  real  effect  of  direct  legislation  is  negative.  It  does 
not  pnrif  J,  but  deprives  the  legislature  of  that  power  of 
law-making  which  now  makes  its  corruption  and  control 
worth  while.  He  who  advocates  the  referendum  in  our 
States  thereby  declares  his  belief  in  the  hopeless  failure 
of  our  legislatures.  He  has  lost  his  faith  even  in  direct 
representation,  or  a  single  delegation  of  power,  and  sees 
relief  only  where  the  voter  can  with  his  own  hand  at  the 
polls  express  his  wishes  respecting  the  laws  by  which 
he  is  to  be  governed.  It  seems  difficult  to  reason  away 
the  assertion  that  the  efficiency  of  our  legislatures  can 
Idc  restored  through  the  institution  of  other  reforms  al- 
ready discussed.  The  substitution  of  the  initiative  and 
the  referendum  would  probably  involve  our  government 
in  numerous  unforeseen  difficulties,  as  was  suggested  in 
the  preceding  chapter.  An  active  representative  legisla- 
ture is  indispensable  to-day.  It  can  be  restored  through 
the  further  improvement  of  our  election  and  nomination 
machinery;  through  the  extension  of  corrupt  practices 
legislation;  through  the  institution  of  civil  service  re- 
form; and  finally,  if  deemed  politic,  through  propor- 
tional representation.  lor  this  reason  it  would  seem 
that  the  reformatory  forces  in  the  field  of  politics  ought 
to  co-operate  rather  for  the  restoration  of  efficiency  in 
our  legislatures,  than  for  a  redistribution  of  legislative 
functions  which  v/oulJ  rob  our  lawmakers  of  their  power, 
and  would  leave  the  legislature  a  secondary  and  broken 
institution. 

We  are  now  ready  to  draw  some  conclusion  as  to  what 
ought  to  be  the  order  of  refonn  in  our  political  insti- 
tutions. True  reform  in  a  representative  government 
must  follow  the  natural  flow  of  power.     It  must  begin 


The  Program  of  Reform.  467 

at  tlie  source,  and  having  insured  its  piiritv,  it  must  then 
^lard  the  onward  coursing  stream  against  the  ever- 
threatening  presence  of  corruption.     The  people,  there- 
fore, are  the  starting  point.     They  having  been  aroused 
tangible  results  may  be  achieved.     Since  the  power  of 
government  streams  from  the  political  party,  the  mem- 
bers must  be  protected  in  the  selection  of  their  candi- 
dates  for   public   office, — our  nominating   institutions 
must  be  reformed.   Then  follows  the  contest  between  the 
parties  which  must  be  won  on  merit,  and  fought  on  fair- 
ness,— our  election  machinery  must  be  still  further  im- 
proved.   With  the  party  and  its  officers  once  installed  in 
power,  the  temptation  to  corruption,  abuse,  and  narrow 
partisanship,  Avhich  operates  before  as  well  as   after 
election,  must  be  destroyed  by  the  elimination  of  the 
spoils  of  office, — our  civil  service  must  be  still  further 
reformed.    These  reforms  will  yield  representative  party 
government,  and  should  it  be  deemed  expedient  and  wise, 
the  right  to  representation,  which  would  thereby  have 
acquired  meaning  and  power,  might  then  be  extended  to 
minorities  through  the  inauguration  of  some  scheme  of 
proportional  representation.    And,  finally,  with  the  rep- 
resentative theory  worked  out  as  far  as  possible  in  our 
legislatures,  and  in  every  other  department  of  govern- 
ment, there  would  remain  the  necessity  of  the  initiative 
and  the  referendum  for  that  class  of  legislation  in  which 
a  delegated  power  of  lawmaking  is  inadequate  or  fails 
altogether, — the  principle  of  direct  legislation  must  be 
judiciously  extended. 

Here  would  seem  to  be  a  program  of  reform, — a  logi- 
cal order  in  which  the  efforts  of  reform  ought  to  be  con- 
centrated.    Not  that  each  must  be  carried  to  its  perfect 


46 S         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Beforms. 

completiori  before  tlie  next  is  undertaken,  but  that  begin- 
ning with  the  fundamental  reform  of  our  nominating 
institutions,  each  succeeding  reform  must,  if  its  fruits 
are  to  be  enjoyed,  be  built  upon  that  which  precedes  it. 
This  fact  is  eloquently  demonstrated  by  the  Australian 
ballot  reform,  which,  while  it  has  wrought  wonderful 
improvements,  but  partially  yields  the  benefits  that  will 
flow  out  to  the  people  when  once  our  nominating  machin- 
ery has  been  given  a  successful  legal  setting.  The  vari- 
ous reforms  are  all  complementary  to  each  other,  and  co- 
operate for  a  common  end.  Independent  reform,  when 
illogically  prosecuted,  can  accomplish  but  little,  for  the 
progress  of  one  reform  vitally  affects  the  progress  of 
every  other,  and  each  as  fundamental  to  the  next,  must 
be  kept  in  the  van;  otherwise,  the  reform  agitator  but 
wastes  much  time  and  effort,  and  dulls  the  people  to  the 
merits  of  his  cause  by  prima  facie  evidence  that  its  weak- 
ness denies  it  a  voice  in  law. 

For  example,  even  though  we  admit  that  proportional 
representation  and  direct  legislation,  by  purifying  the 
legislatures  of  this  country,  would  remedy  the  worst  of 
the  existing  evils  in  democratic  government,  there  is  at 
present  no  way  in  which  such  reforms  can  be  instituted. 
They  cannot  be  forced  down  upon  our  legislators  and 
upon  the  people  by  some  power  from  above,  because  there 
exists  no  such  power.  They  can  be  introduced  only  by 
influences  radiating  into  our  legislative  halls  from  the 
masses,  and  through  our  nomination  and  election  machin- 
ery. But  even  though  the  people  are  with  the  reform, 
we  know  that  to-day  they  repeatedly  find  themselves 
powerless  even  though  willing  to  act.  Their  voice  has 
been  monopolized  by  "machine"  politicians.     Their  own 


Tlce  Program  of  Reform.  4G9 

government  is  deaf  to  their  demands.  Can  we  gainsay 
this  ?  Eeview  the  field  of  politics.  Note  the  forces  of 
reform.  See  their  expression  in  thousands  of  newspapers 
and  magazines.  Hear  their  voice  in  thousands  of  mouths 
irom  platform  and  pulpit.  Listen  to  the  assenting 
cheers  of  assemblages.  From  all  over  the  land  come  the 
confirming  murmurs  of  the  multitudes.  Are  the  people 
for  reform  ?  Do  the  people  want  good  government  ? 
Who  can  doubt  it  ? 

Now  turn  to  our  legislative  halls.  What  are  the  tan- 
gible results  of  years  of  agitation  ?  What  has  been  ac- 
complished in  the  ranks  of  our  civil  service  ?  For  dec- 
ades, earnest  and  powerful,  there  has  risen  the  cry 
against  the  spoils  system, — the  reward,  a  few  reform 
aets.^  For  years  have  men  fought  against  the  purchase 
of  votes, — the  result,  successful  corrupt  practices  laws 
in  but  few  States.  Young,  but  overwhelming,  is  the 
movement  for  better  primaries,  but  the  laws  are  being 
-defeated,  although  success  is  greater  here  than  elsewhere. 
What  is  the  significance  of  all  this  ?  Does  it  not  prove 
that  our  legislatures  are  out  of  harmony  with  the  people  ? 
What  must  be  done,  therefore,  is  the  prosecution  of  a 
fundamental  reform.  What  is  of  paramount  importance 
is  the  improvement  of  our  nominating  and  election  in- 
stitutions. We  must  restore  to  government  the  voice  of 
the  people  by  going  back  to  its  source — the  primary. 
There  lies  the  well  of  power.  There  opens  up  the  door- 
way to  all  reform. 

The  prospects  of  the  direct  primary  are  bright.  Its 
friends,  though  new,  are  staunch,  and  grow  in  rapid 
.numbers.     The  first  important  step  which  is  now  being 

1  Our  national  government  rests  upon  a  fairly  good  basis. 


470         Direct  Pi'hnary  and  Other  Reforms. 

taken,  is  always  the  hardest.  Defeat  mars  most  the 
dawnings  of  success.  In  the  progress  of  primary  re- 
form we  find  the  strength  of  ultimate  victory.  The 
power  to  do  rests  with  the  American  people.  It  is  found 
in  their  past  and  their  present.  As  we  look  abroad  in 
our  land  and  see  the  marvels  that  recent  years  have 
wrought,  we  are  inspired  to  say  with  one  of  the  greatest 
spirits  of  primary  reform,  "Strengthen  thine  heart  and 
be  of  good  cheer."  The  possibilities  of  the  future  seem 
infinite.  The  wheels  of  progress  are  advancing  a  young 
and  sturdy  nation  as  they  are  no  other.  The  expectations 
of  our  fathers  have  long  been  left  behind,  and  the  dreams 
of  youth  are  already  ours.  Prosperity  is  written  every- 
where. The  Nation  is  glad  in  the  plenty  of  its  fields, 
and  mines,  and  factories.  Life  is  strong,  busy,  and 
fruitful.  ^len  are  content,  confident,  and  hopeful.  All 
are  ready  to  do  for  their  countrymen  as  for  their  homes. 
The  daily  way  is  spirited  with  a  firm  good  cheer  that  in- 
spires the  many  with  boundless  faith  in  their  power  to 
act  and  to  overcome. 

With  modest  enthusiasm  we  greet  our  growing  suc- 
cess, and  cherish  an  honest  pride  in  our  joy.  What  we 
have  and  what  we  are  rests  upon  what  we  have  done.  It 
springs  from  the  industry  and  skill  of  our  laboring  men, 
our  capitalists,  our  educators,  our  politicians,  and  our 
legislators.  Success  has  come  not  because  there  were  no 
difficulties,  but  in  spite  of  them.  As  problem  after 
problem  has  arisen,  it  has  been  grappled  with  and  solved. 
The  Nation  has  held  its  own.  Thus  to-day,  we  may  well 
feel  confident  of  the  future  though  the  burden  grows 
gi'eater  as  we  grow  stronger.  The  cries  of  ruin  and  per- 
dition which  rise  from  despondent  lips,  receive  but  a 


The  Program  of  lieform.  471 

passing,  sympathizing  ear,  for  the  heart  beats  that  all 
•will  go  well.  We  meet  the  dangers  that  beset  us  firm 
in  the  power  of  avoiding  their  clutch. 

It  is  in  this  hopeful  spirit  that  the  writer  has  en- 
deavored to  deal  with  the  difficulties  which  exist  in  poli- 
tics to-day.  Not,  however,  with  an  optimistic  eye  blinded 
to  fact,  but  with  an  observing,  reckoning  spirit,  which, 
though  it  discovers  much  that  is  evil,  sees  much  more 
good  than  is  needed  for  its  correction.  When  men  pre- 
dict the  end  of  democratic  government  in  an  approaching 
despotism  of  one-man-power,  we  pray  them  to  consider. 
That  our  political  institutions  are  not  what  they  ought 
to  be  is  plain.  That  they  are  not  hopelessly  perverted 
is  equally  plain.  Where  we  profess  democracy  and  have 
it  not,  democracy  will  be  regained.  Not,  however, 
through  the  elimination  of  all  political  combinations, 
but  through  their  transformation  from  selfish,  unscrupu- 
lous bodies  dominated  by  private  interests,  to  unselfish, 
public-spirited,  organized  groups  of  men,  through  whose 
united  action  alone  a  particular  branch  of  political  busi- 
ness can  be  satisfactorily  carried  on. 

This  transformation  will  come  about  by  restoring  to 
every  voter  an  effective  vote,  and  M'ill  be  accomplished 
through  a  movement  of  the  masses,  not  the  few.  Where 
'Machine"  politics  rules  it  is  the  people  who  are  ousted 
from  power,  who  rebel,  and  who  will  re-establish  them- 
selves. They  may  suffer  abuse  and  deception  for  a  time, 
but  they  cannot  be  blinded  long.  Ultimately  they  will 
see  and  act,  and  law  will  correct  the  wrong,  subject  the 
"machine,"  and  once  more  make  the  servant  master  a 
master  servant. 


.4:72         Direct  Primary  and  Other  Reforms. 

REFERENCES. 

BucKALEW,  Charles  R.    Proportional  Representation.    1873. 

Commons,  John  R.     Proportional  Representation.     1896. 

Commons,  John  R.  Proportional  Representation  in  Belgium.  Re- 
view of  Reviews,  Vol.  XXI,  p.  583  (May,  1900). 

Cridge,  Alfred.  Proportional  Representation  in  its  Relation  to 
the  Initiative  and  Referendum.    1896. 

Grey,  A.  Proportional  Representation  and  the  Majority.  Nine- 
teenth Century,  Vol.  XVI,  p.  935  (December,  1884). 

James,  E.  J.  An  Early  Essay  in  Proportional  Representatioa 
Pub.  Amer.  Acad,  of  Polit.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  No.  168.    1896. 

McCracken,  W.  D.  Proportional  Representation.  Arena,  VoL 
VII,  p.  290  (February,  1893). 

Westlake,  J.  Proportional  Representation.  Contemporary,  VoL 
XLV,  p.  417  (March,  1884). 

The  Proportional  Representational  Review.    A  Quarterly 

Magazine. 


APPENDIX. 


PEIMAEY  ELECTION  LAW  OF  MINNESOTA. 

AN  ACT  PROVIDING  FOR  THE  SELECTION  OF  CANDI- 
DATES FOR  ELECTIONS  BY  POPULAR  VOTE  AND 
RELATING  TO  ELECTIONS. 

Be  it  enacted  "by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Minnesota: 

Section  1.  On  Tuesday  seven  (7)  weeks  preceding  any  election  (ex- 
cept town,  village  or  special  elections)  at  which  officers  'n  this 
state  are  to  be  elected,  primary  elections  shall  be  held  in  the 
several  election  districts  comprised  within  the  territory  for 
which  such  officers  are  to  be  elected,  in  accordance  with  this 
act,  which  shall  be  known  as  the  primary  election,  for  the  purpose 
of  choosing  'candidates  for  all  elective  district,  county  and  city 
officers,  and  elective  members  of  school  boards,  park  boards,  lib- 
rary boards,  in  cities  having  over  50,000  inhabitants,  and  all  other 
officers  which  are  to  be  chosen  wholly  by  electors  within  any  sub- 
division of  this  state,  except  state  officers  who  are  chosen  wholly 
by  the  electors  of  the  entire  state,  and  elective  members  of  school 
boards,  park  boards  and  library  boards  in  towns  and  villages  and 
in  cities  of  this  state  having  50,000  inhabitants  or  less,  at  said  en- 
suing election,  and  said  primary  election  day  shall  be  and  constitute 
the  first  day  of  registration  of  electors  for  the  next  ensuing  election 
in  all  election  districts  of  counties  which  are  subject  to  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act,  and  shall  be  in  lieu  of  the  first  day  now  provided 
by  law  for  the  registration  of  electors  in  such  districts;  but  nothing 
herein  shall  be  construed  to  affect  the  date  of  the  second  or  subse- 
quent registration  days  now  provided  by  law.  For  all  other  official 
positions  within  the  gift  of  the  people  by  ballot  such  other  pro- 
"i^isions  as  are  provided  by  law  shall  apply. 

POLITICAL   PARTIES. 

Section  2.  A  political  party  within  the  meaning  of  this  act  Is  one 
which  shall  have  cast  at  least  ten  (10)  per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  cast 
.at  the  last  proceeding  [preceding]  election  for  its  leading  candidate, 
.or  shall  present  to  the  county  auditor  a  petition  asking  for  the 
right  to  have  a  primary  election  ticket  as  hereinafter  provided  for, 
such  petition  to  contain  at  least  ten  (10)  per  cent,  of  the  qualified 
electors  of  the  county  in  which  the  privilege  is  asked.  Nominations 
of  candidates  for  said  offices  shall  be  made  by  such  political  parties 
In  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  act  and  not  otherwise; 
provided,  that  nothing  herein  contained  shall  be  construed  to  pre- 
vent the  nomination  of  candidates  for  such  offices  by  any  groups. 


474  Ax>pendix. 


individuals  or  so-called  political  parties  which  are  not  recogrnlzed 
political  parties  in  accordance  with  this  section,  by  petition  in  ac- 
cordance with  chapter  four  (4)  of  the  General  Laws  of  Minnesota 
for  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-three  (1893),  which  act  shall  be 
herein  referred  to  as  the  general  election  law. 

ELECTION   DISTRICTS. 

Section  3.  The  election  districts  for  the  purposes  of  this  act  shall 
be  the  districts  which  shall  be  fixed  and  determined  according  to 
law  for  the  purposes  of  the  election  next  following  the  primary 
election;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  city  council,  the  supervis- 
ors of  the  towns  or  other  officers  required  by  said  general  election 
law  to  divide  the  territory  over  which  they  have  jurisdiction  into 
various  election  districts,  to  make  such  division  at  least  two  (2) 
weeks  prior  to  the  holding  of  said  primary  election.  The  maps 
or  description  of  such  division  required  by  said  general  election 
law  to  be  made  and  posted  shall  be  made  and  posted  at  least  one 
week  preceding  said  primary  election,  and  copies  of  such  map  or 
description  shall  be  furnished  to  the  judges  of  primary  election  in 
each  district. 

CANDIDATES. 

Section  4.  At  least  twenty  (20)  days  before  the  primary  election 
day,  any  person  who  shall  be  eligible  to  an  office  which  he  seeks 
shall  appear  before  or  file  with  the  secretary  of  state,  if  an  office 
to  be  voted  for  in  more  than  one  county,  or  the  county  auditor,  if 
to  be  voted  for  in  a  single  county,  with  an  affidavit  to  the  effect 
that  it  is  bona  fide  his  intention  to  run  for  the  nomination  for  any 
specified  oflSce,  and  upon  payment  to  the  secretary  of  state  of 
twenty  (20)  dollars,  if  for  any  other  office  to  be  voted  for  In  more 
than  one  county,  and  if  to  be  voted  for  in  only  one  county  ten  (10) 
dollars  to  the  county  auditor  thereof,  a  receipt  for  which  shall  be 
given  him,  the  county  auditor  shall  place  his  name  upon  the  pri- 
mary election  ballot  of  his  party,  as  hereinafter  provided. 

The  secretary  of  state  and  county  auditor  shall  number  each 
affidavit  so  filed  with  them  in  numerical  order  as  received.  Such 
fee  of  ten  (10)  dollars,  in  case  of  a  candidate  for  a  city  office,  shall 
be  immediately  paid  into  the  city  treasury  by  the  county  auditor. 
in  case  of  fees  received  by  him,  and  in  other  cases  of  fees  received 
by  him,  shall  be  so  paid  into  the  county  treasury,  but  no  fee  shall 
be  required  from  any  person  who  is  a  candidate  for  any  office  to 
which  no  compensation  is  authorized  to  be  paid. 

In  case  of  fees  paid  to  secretary  of  state  as  aforesaid,  he  shall 
Immediately  after  the  last  day  for  filing  nomination  affidavits 
with  him  has  expired,  divide  the  amounts  of  the  fees  of 
candidates  equally  between  the  counties  within  which  such  can- 
didates are  to  run  for  office,  and  issue  warrants  for  said  amounts 
to  the  state  treasurer,  who  will  remit  and  pay  the  same  at  once 
to  the  treasurers  of  said  counties  respectively. 

Said  aflSdavit  may  be  in  substantially  the  following  form: 

I,   A B being  duly  sworn  (or  affirmed),   say  that  I  reside  at 

Number street (city  or  town)  of County  of State  of  Min- 
nesota, and  am  a  qualified  voter  therein,  and  a (name  of  party), 

that  I  am  a  candidate  for  nomination  to  the  office  of to  be  made 


Primary  Election  Law  of  Minnesota.  475 

at  the  primary  election  of  said  party  to  be  held  on  — ,  snd  hereby 
request  that  my  name  be  printed  upon  the  official  primary  ballot, 

as   provided  by   law,    as  a  candidate   of  the party. 

Subscribed  and  sworn  (or  affirmed)  to  before  me date  — 

Section  5.  The  method  of  voting  at  such  primary  election  shall  b© 
by  ballot,  and  all  ballots  voted  shall  be  printed  as  herein  provided. 
On  the  nineteenth  (19th)  day  before  the  primary  election  the  sec- 
retary of  state  shall  certify  to  the  county  auditors  of  the  several 
counties  the  names  of  all  qualified  candidates  of  the  several  po- 
litical parties  to  be  voted  for  within  such  counties,  whose  affidavits 
have  been  filed  with  him  as  in  this  act  provided;  and  on  the  four- 
teenth (14th)  day  before  the  primary  election  each  county  auditor 
shall  group  all  the  candidates  for  each  party  by  themselves,  and 
shall  prepare  at  once  in  writing  a  separate  ballot  for  ea,ch  party 
for  public  inspection,  which  he  shall  post  in  a  conspicuous  place 
In  his  office,  and  shall  publish  the  same  twice,  before  said  primary 
election  day,  in  the  official  paper  of  his  county,  said  publications 
being  made  one  week  apart.  He  shall  then  proceed  to  have  printed 
a  separate  primary  election  ballot  for  each  political  party  which 
has  qualified  as  hereinbefore  provided,  these  ballots  to  be  prepared 
in   the   following  manner: 

Each  party  ticket  shall  be  absolutely  uniform  in  color  and  size, 
shall  be  white  and  printed  in  black  ink.  Across  the  head  of  each 
ballot  shall  be  printed  in  plain  black  type,  first,  the  name  of  the 
political  party  on  each  ticket,  following  the  words,  "Primary  Elec- 
tion Ballot."  On  the  next  line  and  in  smaller  type  shall  be  printed 
the  words,   "List  of  Candidates  for  Nomination  to  Be  Votdl  for  In 

District "  (naming  the  district  that  certain  ballot  is  intended  for) 

Ward  (naming  the  ward  that  certain  ballot  is  intended  for),  fol- 
lowed by  the  name  of  the  city,  town  or  village  in  which  the  ballot 
is  to  be  used. 

On  the  next  line,  and  to  the  right  on  the  ballot,  shall  be  a  fac- 
simile of  the  signature  of  the  county  auditor  making  up  the  tickets, 
followed  by  the  words  "County  Auditor." 

The  balance  of  the  ticket  is  to  be  made  up  in  the  same  manner 
as  the  ballots  used  at  general  election,  except  that:  The  tickets  are 
to  be  made  up  under  the  head  in  two  (2)  columns,  with  a  design  of 
parallel  or  filigree  rule  one-quarter  (lA)  inch  wide,  to  separate  the 
columns. 

At  the  top  of  each  column  shall  appear  the  words,  "To  vote  for 
a  person  mark  a  cross,  X,  in  the  square  at  the  right  of  the  name  of 
the  person  for  whom  you  desire  to  vote." 

Each  one  of  these  sentences  at  the  head  of  each  column  shall  be 
enclosed  in  a  rule,  the  same  as  the  name  of  each  candidate,  and 
at  its  end  shall  be  a  square  directly  over  the  squares  in  which 
marks  are  to  be  made,  that  square  to  have  a  black  cross,  X,  which 
shall  show  the  voter  how  to  mark  the  ballot. 

Beginning  at  the  top  of  the  left  hand  column  at  the  left  of  the 
line,  in  black  type,  shall  appear  the  position  for  which  the  names 
following  are  candidates,  and  to  the  extreme  right  of  the  same 
line  the  words  "vote  for,"  then  the  word  "one,"  "two,"  or  a  spelled 
number  designating  how  many  persons  under  that  head  are  to  be 
voted  for. 


47G  Aj>pendix. 


Following  this  shall  come  the  names  of  each  candidate  for  that 
position,  enclosed  in  a  light  face  rule,  with  a  square  to  the  extreme 
right,  the  parallel  rules  containing  the  names  to  be  three-sixteenths 
(3-16)   of  an  Inch  apart. 

Each  position  ■with  the  names  running  for  that  position  shall  ba 
separated  from  the  following  one  by  a  black  face  rule  to  separate 
each  position  clearly. 

The  positions  shall  be  arranged  as  follows,  provided  nominees 
for  such  positions  are  to  be  selected  in  said  county  under  the  pro- 
visions  of  this   act  hereinafter  provided: 

First,  judicial;  next,  congressional;  next,  legislative;  next,  county 
officers;  next,  city  officers;  in  all  cases  following  under  each  head- 
ing given,  the  rotation  used  in  the  make-up  of  the  various  ballots 
at  the  general  election. 

Section  6.  The  names  of  candidates  for  each  office  upon  the  sam- 
ple ballot  shall  be  arranged  alphabetically,  according  to  surnames. 

The  names  of  candidates  under  headings  designating  each  official 
position  shall  be  alternated  on  the  ballots  in  the  printing  in  the 
following  manner: 

First,  the  forms  shall  be  set  up  with  the  names  in  the  order  In 
which  they  are  placed  upon  the  sample  ballot  prepared  by  the  coun- 
ty auditor.  In  printing  each  set  of  tickets  for  the  various  election 
districts,  the  positions  of  the  names  shall  be  changed  in  each  office 
division  as  many  times  as  there  are  candidates  in  the  office  di- 
vision in  which  there  are  the  most  names.  As  nearly  as  possible 
an  equal  number  of  tickets  shall  be  printed  after  each  change.  In 
making  the  changes  of  position,  the  printer  shall  take  the  line  of 
type  at  the  head  of  each  office  division  and  place  it  at  the  bottom 
of  that  division,  shoving  up  the  column,  so  that  the  name  that  was 
second  before  the  change  shall  be  first  after  the  change. 

After  the  ballots  are  printed,  before  being  cut,  they  shall  be  kept 
In  separate  piles,  one  pile  for  each  change  of  position,  and  shall  be 
then  piled  by  taking  one  from  each  pile  and  placing  it  upon  the 
pile  to  be  cut,  the  intention  being  that  every  other  ballot  in  the  pile 
of  printed  sheets  shall  have  names  in  a  different  position. 

After  the  pile  is  made  in  this  manner,  then  they  may  be  cut,  and 
placed  in  blocks  as  provided  by  the  general  election  law. 

There  shall  be  no  printing  on  the  back  of  the  ballots,  or  any  mark 
to  distinguish  them,  but  the  initials  of  thq  judge  or  clerk. 

Except  as  herein  otherwise  provided,  the  following  sections  of 
said  general  election  law  are  hereby  made  applicable  to  primary 
elections  and  primary  election  ballots,  under  this  act,  to-wit: 

Sections  twenty-three  (LJ),  twenty-four  (24),  twenty-flve  (25), 
twenty-six  (26),  twenty-nine  (29)  and  thirty  (30). 

NOTICES  AND  PLACE  OF  PRIMAttY  ELECTIONS. 

Section  7.  The  primary  election  shall  be  held  in  each  election  dis- 
trict at  the  place  where  the  last  election  was  held,  or  such  other 
place  as  may  be  lawfully  designated  for  the  polling  place  for  the 
election  distrl  t,  and  shall  be  held  at  the  place  where  the  registra- 
tion of  voters  occurs  for  the  election  then  next   ensuing. 

The  notice  required  by  section  forty-six  (46)  of  said  general  elec- 
tion law  shall  be  given  with  reference  to  such  primary  election  and 


Primary  Election  Law  of  Minnesota.         477 

said  election  is  hereby  made  applicable  to  primary  elections  held 
hereunder. 

JUDGES  AND  CLERKS. 

Section  8.  The  judges  of  election  within  the  cov^itles  subject  to 
the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  appointed  and  designated  In  th© 
manner  provided  by  said  general  election  law  at  least  ten  (10) 
days  prior  to  the  primary  eleetion  day,  and  the  judges  of  election 
so  designated  in  and  for  each  election  district  in  such  county  and 
sitting  therein  as  a  board  of  registration  shall  be  and  constitute  the 
judges  of  primary  election  for  such  district. 

In  all  election  districts  wherein  provision  is  made  by  said  general 
election  law  for  the  appointment  of  clerks  of  election,  such  clerks 
shall  be  appointed  by  the  judges  of  election  in  the  manner  provided 
by  section  fifty-two  (52)  of  said  general  election  law,  and  said  clerKn 
shall  assist  the  said  board  on  and  during  the  primary  election  and 
registration  upon  said  primary  election  day. 

The  clerks  may  handle  and  make  the  necessary  entries  in  the 
books  of  registration  and  the  tally  sheets  in  counting,  or  perform 
such  other  work  as  the  judges  may  assign  to  them. 

In  case  of  emergency  said  judges  may  call  to  their  assistance 
and  appoint  a  number  of  clerks,  not  exceeding  two  additional, 
having  the  same  qualifications  as  the  said  first  named  clerks,  pro- 
viding that  said  last  named  clerks  shall  receive  no  pay,  unless 
It  shall  appear  that  they  were  necessarily  appointed,  and  shall 
receive  pay  for  such  time  only  as  they  are  necessarily  employed 
to  meet  such  emergency. 

Section  9.  If  a  judge  or  clerk  of  election  shall  fail  to  attend  at 
said  primary  election,  or  be  a  candidate  thereat,  disqualified,  re- 
fuses to  act,  or  fails  to  qualify,  or  if  any  vacancy  occurs,  judges 
shall  be  chosen  and  clerks  appointed  to  act  instead  in  the  manner 
prescribed  by  sections  fifty-four  (54)  and  eighty-eight  (88)  of  said 
general  election  law,  which  sections  are  hereby  made  applicable 
to  primary  elections  held  under  this  act  so  far  as  may  be,  and 
all  judges  and  clerks  before  acting  shall  qualify  by  taking  and 
subscribing  the  oath  as  In  section  fifty-four  (54)  provided,  which 
oath  shall  be  held  to  cover  the  duties  of  judges  and  clerks  of 
elections  at  such  primary  election. 

On  the  primary  election  day  the  judges  and  clerks  of  elections 
shall  perform  both  the  duties  of  the  board  of  registration  as  pre- 
scribed by  said  general  election  law  and  the  duties  of  judges  and 
clerks  of  primary  election,  but  shall  receive  single  pay  for  actual 
time  employed  only,  notwithstanding  they  act  in  such  double  ca- 
pacity. 

REGISTERS. 

Section  10.  The  registers  provided  by  said  general  election  law  for 
the  registration  of  voters  stiall  have  therein  an  additional  column 
headed  "Voted,  Primary  Election."  No  names  of  voters  shall  be 
placed  upon  said  registers  prior  to  the  day  of  primary  election; 
nor  shall  any  be  placed  thereon  upon  said  day,  in  any  incorporated 
city,  except  of  those  who  shall  appear  in  person  before  the  board 
of  registration  for  that  purpose. 


478         ""  Appendix. 


COPIES  OF  LAV. 

Section  11.  The  secretary  of  state  shall  provide  copies  of  this  law 
in  conjunction  with  said  general  election  law  as  amended,  and 
transmit  the  same  to  the  county  auditor  of  those  counties  which 
are  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  act,  at  least  nine  (9)  days 
before  any  such  primary  election,  and  the  same  shall  be  in  lieu 
of  any  such  copies  of  said  general  election  law  required  to  be 
transmitted  to  county  auditors  by  the  secretary  of  state  for  use 
in  such  counties. 

LIQUOR  AND  SALOONS. 

Section  12.  The  provisions  of  sections  sixteen  (16),  seventeen  (17), 
nnd  eighteen  (18)  of  said  general  election  law,  relating  to  liquor 
and  saloons,  except  the  closing  of  the  saloons  on  election  day,  shall 
apply  in  like  manner  to  the  primary  election  day,  under  this  act, 
during  all  the  times  that  the  polls  are  required  to  be  open,  and 
the  said  sections  are  hereby  adopted  as  a  part  of  this  act,  and  the 
mayor  shall  make  proclamation  as  to  said  primary  election  day 
in  accordance  therewith. 

ARRANGEMENT  AT  POLLS,    BALLOT  BOXES,    ETC. 

Section  13.  The  following  sections  of  said  general  election  law  as 
amended,  relating  to  the  place  of  holding  the  election,  change 
thereof,  arrangements  at  polling  places,  the  ballot  boxes,  booths, 
constables,  sheriffs,  police  officers,  arrests  and  gatekeepers,  are 
liereby  made  applicable  to  primary  elections  lield  under  this  act, 
to-wit:  Sections  seventy-four  (74),  seventy-five  (75),  seventy-six 
(76),  seventy-seven  (77),  seventy-eight  (78),  seventy-nine  (79),  eighty 
(80)  and  eighty-seven  (87);  except  that  no  more  than  one  (1)  ballot 
box  for  male  voters,  and  one  (1)  ballot  box  for  women  who  may 
be  entitled  to  register  and  vote  at  the  next  ensuing  election  for 
any  officer  for  which  nom.ination  is  to  be  made  at  the  primary  elec- 
tion, shall  be  provided  for  the  primary  election;  and 'for  the 
purpose  of  determining  the  number  of  booths  to  be  provided,  re- 
course shall  be  had  to  the  number  of  electors  registered  at  the 
last  preceding  election  within  the  same  territory,  ascertained  as 
near  as  may  be. 

SUPPLIES  FOR   POLL.S,    ETC. 

Section  14.  The  following  sections  of  said  general  election  law, 
except  as  herein  otherwise  provided,  are  hereby  made  applicable 
to  primary  elections  held  under  this  act,  to-wit:  Sections  eighty- 
one  (81),  eighty-two  (82),  eighty-three  (8.3),  eighty-four  (84),  eighty- 
five  (85),  eighty-six  (86). 

VOTING. 

Section  15.  The  polls  in  the  several  election  districts  on  the  pri- 
mary election  day  shall  be  kept  open  for  the  purpose  of  voting, 
and  the  same  officers  shall  remain  in  session  for  the  purpose  of 
registration  of  voters,  for  the  same  length  of  time,  which  shall 
be  from  six  (6)  o'clock  in  the  morning  until  nine  (9)  o'clock  in  the 
evening.  If  at  the  hour  of  closing  there  are  any  electors  in  the 
polling  place,  or  in  line  at  the  door,  desiring  to  vote,  and  who  aro 
qualified  to  register  and  participate  therein,  and  have  not  been 
able  to  do  so  since  appearing  at  the  polling  place,  said  polls  shall 


Primary  Election  Law  of  JIi7mesota.  479 

"be  kept  open  reasonably  long  enough  after  the  hour  for  closln? 
to  allow  those  present  at  that  hour  to  register  and  vote.  No  one 
not  present  at  the  hour  of  closing  shall  be  entitled  to  register 
and  vote  because  the  polls  may  not  actually  be  closed  when  he 
arrives. 

No  adjournment  or  intermission  whatever  shall  take  place  until 
the  polls  shall  be  closed  and  until  all  the  votes  cast  at  such  poll 
have  been  counted  and  the  result  publicly  announced;  but  thi? 
•shall  not  be  deemed  to  prevent  any  temporary  recess  while  taking 
meals  or  other  necessary  delay,  provided  that  the  board  shall 
remain  in  session  and  that  no  more  than  one  member  of  the  board 
of  election  shall  at  any  time  be  absent  from  the  polling  place. 

Section  16.  All  persons  entitled  to  registration  as  voters  in  the 
election  district  on  the  day  of  the  primary  election,  for  the  purpose 
of  voting  at  the  ensuing  election,  shall  be  entitled  to  participate 
in  the  primary  election,  but  no  voter  shall  receive  a  primary  ballot 
■or  be  entitled  to  vote  until  he  shall  have  first  been  duly  registered 
as  a  voter  then  and  there  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  upon 
"Which  registration  (unless  challenged,  and  if  challenged,  then  only 
in  event  that  the  challenge  is  determined  in  favor  of  the  voter), 
Tie  shall  be  entitled  forthwith,  but  not  later,  to  receive  a  ballot  of 
the  political  party  with  which  he  then  declares  (under  oath,  if  his 
right  thereto  is  challenged))  that  he  affiliated,  and  whose  candi- 
dates he  generally  supported  at  the  last  general  election,  and  with 
■which  party  he  proposes  to  affiliate  at  the  next  election;  provided, 
that  a  first  voter  shall  not  be  required  to  declare  his  past  political 
affiliation.  Such  ballot  shall  be  indorsed  with  the  initials  of  two 
of  the  judges  upon  the  back  of  the  ballot  at  the  bottom  edge.  A 
judge  of  election  shall  instruct  the  voter  that  he  is  to  vote  for 
his  choice  for  each  office,  using  only  the  ballot  of  the  party  with 
which  he  affiliates,  and  that  he  must  return  the  ballot  folded  with 
"the  edges  upon  which  are  the  initials  of  the  judges  uppermost. 

Section  17.  When  an  elector  has  received  his  ballot,  he  shall  forth- 
with retire  to  an  unoccupied  booth,  and  without  undue  delay  mark 
the  ballot  of  that  party  with  which  he  affiliates  as  he  sees  fit  with 
the  indelible  pencil  to  be  found  in  such  booth.  If  he  soils  or 
defaces  said  ballot,  he  shall  at  once  return  the  same  and  get  a 
new  ballot.  In  marking  his  ballot,  he  shall  observe  the  following 
rules: 

1.  The  elector  shall  designate  his  choice  on  his  ballot  by  mark- 
ing a  cross  (X)  mark  in  each  of  the  small  squares  opposite  the 
names  of  the  candidates  for  whom  he  desires  to  vote,  being  careful 
not  to  vote  for  more  candidates  for  an  office  than  are  to  be  elected 
thereto  at  the  election  to  follow  the  primary  election  as  indicated 
on  the  ballot  at  the  right  of  each  office  for  which  candidates  are  to 
be  selected. 

2.  Rules  Nos.  4  and  5  of  section  one  hundred  (100)  of  said  general 
election  law  relating  to  ballots  wrongly  marked  and  rejected  bal- 
lots are  hereby  made  applicable  to  primary  elections  held  under 
this  act. 

Section  18.  When  an  elector  has  prepared  his  ballot  he  shall  fold 
the  same  with  the  edges  upon  which  are  the  initials  of  the  judges 
■uppermost,   and   so  folded  as   to   conceal   the  face  thereof,   and   all 


480  Ajypendix. 


marks  thereon,  and  shall  hand  the  same  to  the  Judge  of  primary 
election  who  is  in  charge  of  the  ballot  boxes. 

The  folded  ballot,  when  returned,  shall  be  placed  in  the  proper 
ballot  box,  and  the  name  of  the  voter  shall  be  checked  off  upon 
said  registers  in  the  column  headed  primary  election. 

Except  as  herein  otherwise  provided,  the  following  sections  of 
said  general  election  law  are  hereby  made  applicable  to  primary 
elections  held  under  this  act,  to-wit:  Sections  seventy-one  (71), 
seventj'-two  (72),  eighty-nine  (S9),  ninety  (90),  ninety-one  (91),  ninety- 
two  (92),  ninety-three  (93),  ninety-four  (94;,  ninety-seven  (97),  ninety- 
eight  (98),  ninety-nine  (99),  one  hundred  one  (101),  one  hundred  two 
(102),  one  hundred  three  (103),  one  hundred  four  (lOi),  one  hundred 
five  (105),  one  hundred  six  (106),  one  hundred  seven  (107),  one  hun- 
dred eight  (108),  one  hundred  nine  (109),  one  hundred  ten  (110),  one 
hundred  eleven  (111),  one  hundred  twelve  (112),  one  hundred  thir- 
teen (113),  one  hundred  fourteen  (114),  one  hundred  fifteen  (115), 
one  hundred  sixteen  (116),  one  hundred  seventeen  (117),  one  hun- 
dred eighteen  (118). 

Section  19.  As  soon  as  the  polls  are  finally  closed  and  before  the 
canvass  of  votes,  the  judges  and  clerks  of  election  shall  prept^re 
upon  a  blank  delivered  to  them  by  the  county  auditor  for  that 
purpose  a  statement  substantially  as  follows: 

"Poll  list  statement  of  a  primary  election  held  in   (name  of  city 

or   village)    Minnesota ward    or   town district,    on   the  —  (day 

and  year)." 

"The  number  of  persons  whose  names  appear  upon  the  registers 

as  present  at  the  above  named  primary  election  was of  whom 

....  where  [were]  women.  The  number  of  ballots  cast  by  men  was 
....  and  the  number  of  ballots  cast  by  women  was " 

The  blanks  in  said  form  shall  be  filled  by  the  proper  number,  in 
each  case  to  be  written  in  words  and  figures.  Said  form  shall,  be- 
fore the  canvass  of  the  votes,  be  signed  by  each  of  the  judges,  and 
attested  by  each  of  the  clerks.  They  shall  also  fill  at  the  same 
time,  in  the  registers,  in  the  column  for  marking  those  who  "voted" 
at  such  primary  election,  the  word  "no"  opposite  the  name  of 
every  person  whose  name  appears  in  the  said  register  who  has  not 
voted  at  such  primary  election. 

CANVASS  OF  VOTES. 

Section  20.  Upon  the  completion  of  the  matters  prescribed  In  the 
last  section,  the  clerks  and  judges  of  registration  shall  immediately 
open  the  ballot  boxes  at  "-ach  polling  place  and  proceed  to  take 
therefrom  the  ballots.  Said  officers  shall  count  the  number  of 
ballots  cast  by  each  party,  at  the  same  time  bunching  the  tickets 
cast  for  each  party  together  in  separate  piles,  and  shall  then 
fasten  each  pile  separately  by  means  of  a  brass  clip,  or  may  use 
any  means  which  shall  effectually  fasten  each  pile  together  at  the 
top  of  each  ticket. 

As  soon  as  Ihe  clerks  and  judges  shall  have  sorted  and  fastened 
together  the  ballots  for  each  separate  party,  then  they  shall  take 
the  tally  sheets  provided  by  the  county  auditor  and  shall  count 
all  the  ballots  for  each  party  separately  until  the  count  Is  com- 
pleted, and  shall  certify  to  the  number  of  votes  cast  for  each  can- 


Primary  Election  Law  of  Minnesota.  481 

aidate  for  each  office  upon  the  ticket  of  each  party.  They  shall 
then  place  the  counted  ballots  in  the  box,  but  In  no  case  shall  tney 
separate  them  from  each  other.  After  all  have  been  counted  and 
certified  to  by  the  clerks  and  judges  they  shall  seal  the  returns 
for  all  parties  in  one  envelope,  to  be  returned  to  the  county  au- 
ditor. 

Except  as  herein  otherwise  provided,  the  matters  pertaining  to 
the  canvass  of  votes  shall  be  conducted  in  the  manner  prescribed 
by  the  following  sections,  as  amended,  of  such  general  election 
law,  and  the  same  are  hereby  made  applicable  to  primary  elections 
held  under  this  act,  to-wit: 

Sections  one  hundred  and  twenty-three  (123),  one  hundred  twenty- 
five  (125),  one  hundred  twenty-six  (126),  one  hundred  twenty-seven 
(127),  one  hundred  twenty-eight  (128),  one  hundred  twenty-nine  (129), 
one  hundred  thirty-  four  (134),  one  hundred  thirty-five  (135),  one 
hundred  thirty-six  (136),  one  hundred  thirty-seven  (1.37),  one  hundred 
thirty-eight  (138),  one  hundred  forty-eight  (148).  one  hundred  forty- 
nine  (149). 

TALLY  SHBETS. 

Section  21.  Two  tally  books  or  two  sets  of  tally  sheets  for  each  po- 
litical party  having  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  said  primary  elec- 
tion shall  Be  furnished  for  each  election  district  by  the  county  au- 
ditor, at  the  same  time  and  in  tlie  sa.me  manner  that  the  ballots  are 
furnished  and  shall  be  substantially  as  follows: 

Each  tally  sheet  or  the  first  sheet  of  each  tally  book  to  be  fur- 
nished,   shall    be   headed    "Tally    Sheet   for (name    of    political 

party) (name   of  city   or  village) (county), (ward   or  town), 

election  district,  for  a  primary  election  held (date)." 

The  names  of  candidates  shall  be  placed  on  the  tally  sheets  in 
the  order  in  which  they  appear  on  the  oflScial  sample  ballots,  and 
in  each  case  shall  have  the  proper  party  designation  at  the  head 
thereof. 

Except  as  herein  otherwise  provided,  tally  sheets  shall  be  pre- 
pared in  accordance  with  sections  one  hundred  thirty  (130),  one 
hundred  thirty-two  (132)  and  one  hundred  thirty-three  (133)  of  said 
general  election  law,)  and  the  same  are  hereby  made  applicable 
to  primary  elections  held  under  this  act. 

RETURNS. 

Section  22.  In  making  out  the  returns  of  the  primary  election  In 
the  several  election  districts  the  same  shall  be  done  and  all  matters 
pertaining  thereto  conducted  in  accordance  with  the  following 
sections  of  said  general  election  law,  except  as  herein  provided,  to- 
wit: 

Sections  one  hundred  flfty-one  (151),  one  hundred  fifty-two  (152), 
one  hundred  fifty-three  (153),  one  hundred  fifty-six  (156),  one  hun- 
dred fifty-seven  (157),  one  hundred  sixty-one  (161),  and  one  hun- 
dred sixty-two  (162),  and  said  sections  are  hereby  made  applicable 
to  primary  elections  held  under  this  act. 

CANVASSINO  BOARD. 

Section  23.  The  clerk  of  the  district  court  of  the  county,  the 
county  auditor,  the  chairraar  of  the  board  of  county  commissioners, 

31 


482  Ajpjpendix. 


and  two  justices  of  the  peace  of  the  same  county,  of  opposite 
political  parties  from  that  of  the  majority  of  the  other  members 
of  the  canvassing  board,  if  possible,  to  be  selected  by  the  Judge  or 
judges  of  the  district  court,  shall  constitute  the  county  canvassing 
board  for  the  purposes  of  the  primary  election,  and  shall  meet  at 
the  court  house  in  the  county  at  ten  o'clock  in  the  morning  of  the 
second  day  after  said  primary  election,  and  shall  proceed,  after 
taking  the  usual  oath  of  office,  to  openly  and  publicly  canvass  the 
primary  election  returns  made  to  the  county  auditor. 

Provided,  however,  that  no  person  who  shall  be  a  candidate  at 
any  primary  election  shall  be  eligible  to  act  as  a  member  of  said 
canvassing  board,  and  if  any  vacancy  occurs  in  said  canvassing 
board  by  reason  of  the  ineligibility  of  any  of  the  hereinbefore 
mentioned  persons  to  serve,  said  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the 
judges  of  the  district  court  of  the  county  wherein  the  said  primary 
election  is  held,  by  appointing  to  fill  such  vacancy  some  duly  quali- 
fied elector  of  said  county,  who  is  not  a  public  officeholder. 

Any  three  of  said  canvassing  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum, 
and  are  authorized  to  make  the  canvass  herein  provided  and  to 
certify  the  results  thereof. 

The  canvassing  board  shall  not  wait  until  all  the  returns  are  at 
hand  before  beginning,  but  after  filling  out  their  sheets  with  the 
names  and  number  of  the  election  districts,  they  shall  take  such 
election  returns  as  are  at  hand  and  fill  in  the  results  there  shown, 
and  when  the  results  are  not  at  hand  they  shall  leave  a  space  until 
the  missing  returns  are  brought  in. 

Said  canvass  shall  be  completed  by  the  said  county  canvassing 
board  as  to  all  candidates  being  voted  for  in  other  counties,  by 
the  evening  of  the  third  day  following  said  primary  election,  and 
the  result  certified  to  the  secretary  of  state  immediately,  as  here- 
inafter provided. 

Section  24.  The  canvassing  board  shall  make  and  prepare  a  state- 
ment, the  same  to  be  signed  by  the  said  board,  and  filed  in  the 
office  of  the  county  auditor,  as  follows: 

1 — A  statement  containing  the  names  of  all  candidates  voted  for 
at  the  primary  election,  with  the  number  of  votes  received  by 
each,  and  for  what  office,  said  statement  to  be  made  as  to  each  po- 
litical party  separately. 

2 — A  statement  of  the  names  of  the  persons  or  candidates  of 
each  political  party  who  are  nominated,  to-wit:  Those  persons  or 
candidates  of  such  political  party  who  received  the  highest  num- 
ber of  votes  for  the  rerpective  offices;  and  where  there  is  more 
than  one  person  to  be  elected  to  a  given  office  at  the  ensuini? 
election,  there  shall  be  included  in  said  statement  of  nominations 
the  names  of  so  many  candidates  of  such  party  receiving  the 
next  highest  number  of  votes  for  that  office  as  there  are  persons 
to  be  elected  to  such  office  at  said  ensuing  election.  Said  statement 
shall  in  like  manner  be  made  separately  as  to  each  political  party. 
3— A  statement  of  the  whole  number  of  electors  registered  and  the 
number  of  ballots  cast,  male  and  female,  separately  at  such  pri- 
mary election. 

If  two  or  more  candidates  for  the  same  political  party  are  "tied" 
for  the  same  office,  the  "tie"  shall  be  determined  by  lot  to  be  cast 


Primary  Election  Law  of  Minnesota.  483 

then  and  there  by  and  as  the  canvassing  board  may  determine. 
It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  county  auditor,  upon  the  completion  of 
its  canvass  by  said  canvassing  board  to  certify  to  the  secretary 
of  state  the  vote,  as  shown  by  such  statement  for  all  candidates  to 
be  voted  for  in  more  than  one  county  on  or  before  ten  (10)  o'clock 
of  the  morning  of  the  fourth  day  following  said  primary  election, 
and  to  mail  or  deliver  in  person  to  each  candidate  to  be  voted  for 
in  his  county  alone,  by  said  statement  shown  to  be  so  nominated, 
a  notice  of  such  fact,  that  his  name  will  be  placed  upon  the  of- 
ficial ballot  at  the  ensuing  election,  provided  that  a  fee  to  be 
named  therein  is  paid  on  or  before  the  day  to  be  named  therein, 
In  each  case  the  same  to  be  named  in  accordance  with  the  fee  and 
date  required  by  said  general  election  law,  and  a  notice  further 
that  his  name  will  not  be  placed  upon  the  ballot  if  said  fee  is  not 
paid  by  such  time. 

The  ofTicers  who  are  charged  by  law  with  the  duty  of  canvassing 
returns  of  general  elections  made  to  the  secretary  of  state  shall 
also  open  and  canvass  the  returns  made  to  him  of  any  primary 
election,  under  this  act,  at  the  usual  time  and  place,  meeting  for 
the  purpose  on  the  seventh  (7th)  day  following  said  primary  elec- 
tion. They  shall  determine  any  "ties"  between  candidates  in  the 
same  manner  as  in  their  canvass  for  general  elections.  Upon  the 
completion  of  said  canvass,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  secretary 
of  state  to  certify  to  the  several  county  auditors  the  names  of 
the  persons  found  to  be  nominated  for  all  the  offices  to  be  printed 
upon  their  county  tickets,  and  to  mall  to  each  candidate  shown 
by  such  state  canvass  to  be  nominated  for  any  offlce  a  notice  of 
the  fact  and  that  his  name  will  be  printed  upon  the  proper  official 
ballot  for  the  ensuing  election,  upon  the  payment  by  such  candidate 
of  the  proper  nomination  fee  to  the  proper  officer,  as  provided 
by  the  general  election  law. 

Section  25.  The  persons  whose  names  are  so  properly  placed  In 
said  nomination  statem.ent  shall  be  and  constitute  the  nominees  of 
the  several  political  parties  in  which  they  were  candidates,  and 
such  names  shall  be  printed  upon  the  official  ballot  prepared  for 
the  ensuing  election  in  like  manner  as  If  such  persons  had  been 
duly  nominated  by  a  party  convention  of  delegates,  with  the  cer- 
tificate thereof  filed  as  required  by  said  general  election  law;  pro- 
vided, no  name  shall  be  placed  upon  the  ballot  for  said  ensuing 
election  unless  the  further  fee  required  by  said  general  election 
law  is  paid  within  the  time  therein  required,  as  in  case  of  filing  cer- 
tificates of  nominations  from  conventions.  No  names  of  candi- 
dates, when  name  was  upon  the  primary  election  ballot  under  the 
provisions  of  section  4  of  this  act,  shall  be  placed  upon  the  official 
election  ballot  unless  such  candidates  have  been  chosen  in  accord- 
ance with  this  act,  except  In  case  of  a  vacancy  occasioned  by  the 
death,  removal  or  resignation  of  any  candidate  so  chosen  or  arising 
otherwise,  and  in  such  event  the  campaign  or  party  committee 
of  the  same  political  party,  or  if  there  be  no  such  committee,  then 
a  mass  convention  of  such  party,  may  fill  such  vacancy,  the  name 
of  such  new  candidate  to  be  certified  under  oath  to  the  secretary 
of  state  or  county  auditor  or  auditors,  or  both,  as  the  case  may 
be,  by  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  such  committee  or  conven- 
tion. 


484  A])pendix. 


COMPENSATION  AND  EXPENSES. 

Section  26.  The  following  sections  of  said  general  election  law 
relating  to  compensation  and  expenses  are  hereby  made  applicable 
to  primary  elections  held  under  this  act,  except  as  may  be  herein 
otherwise  provided,  to-wit:  Sections  one  hundred  and  fifty-eight 
(15S)  and  one  hundred  seventy-two  (172).  The  compensation  of  the 
clerk  of  the  district  court  shall  be  the  same  as  that  of  other  mem- 
bers of  the  canvassing  board. 

REVIEW  BY  COURTS. 

Section  27.  Whenever  it  shall  appear  by  affidavit  to  any  Judge  of 
the  supreme  court  or  district  court  of  the  county  that  an  error  or 
omission  has  occurred  or  is  about  to  occur  in  the  printing  of  the 
name  of  any  candidate  on  official  ballots,  or  that  any  error  has 
been  or  is  about  to  be  committed  in  printing  the  ballots,  or  that  the 
name  of  any  person  has  been  or  is  about  to  be  wrongfully  placed 
upon  such  ballots,  or  that  any  wrongful  act  has  been  performed 
or  is  about  to  be  performed  by  any  judge  or  clerk  of  the  primary 
election,  county  auditor,  canvassing  board  or  member  thereof,  or 
by  any  person  charged  with  a  duty  under  this  act,  or  that  any 
neglect  of  duty  by  any  of  the  persons  aforesaid  has  occurred,  or 
Is  about  to  occur,  such  judge  shall  by  order  require  the  officer  or 
person  or  persons  charged  with  the  error,  wrongful  act  or  neglect 
to  forthwith  correct  the  error,  desist  from  the  wrongful  act  or 
perform  the  duty,  and  do  as  the  court  shall  order  or  to  show  cause 
forthwith  why  such  error  should  not  be  corrected,  wrongful  act 
desisted  from,  or  such  duty  or  order  performed.  Failing  to  obey 
the  order  of  such  judge  shall  be  contempt. 

Any  candidate  at  such  primary  election  who  may  desire  to  con- 
test the  nomination  of  any  candidate  for  the  same  office  as  [at} 
said  primary  election  may  proceed  by  such  affidavit  so  presented, 
provided  that  such  affidavit  be  presented  within  five  (5)  days  after 
the  completion  of  the  canvass  by  said  canvassing  board,  and  not 
later,  and  the  candidate  whose  nomination  is  so  contested  shall, 
by  the  order  of  such  judge  duly  served,  be  required  to  appear  and 
abide  by  the  orders  of  the  court  to  be  made  therein. 

OFFENSES  AND  PrNISHMENTS. 

Section  28.  The  offenses  and  penalties  and  punishments  thereof, 
as  set  forth  in  the  following  sections  of  said  general  election  law, 
shall  be  applicable  to  the  same  persons  and  matters  pertaining  to 
the  primary  elections  heU^  under  this  act,  and  said  sections  are 
hereby  made  applicable  to  primary  elections  held  under  this  act. 
to-wit:  Section  one  hundred  fifty-nine  (159),  one  hundred  sixty 
(160),  one  hundred  ninety-four  (194),  one  hundred  ninety-five  (195), 
one  hundred  ninety-six  (196)  and  one  hundred  ninety-seven  (197). 

Section  29.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  this  act 
are  hereby  repealed. 

Section  30.  I'his  act  shall  take  effect  and  be  In  force  from  and 
after  September  1st,  1901. 

Approved  April  10th,  1901. 


Provisions  in  Oregon  Primary  Law.  485 

A  provision  in  the  Oregon  direct  primary  Imo  of  1001  to  pre-' 
vent  the  fraudulent  filling  of  deliberatively  created  vacan- 
cies, atid  to  prevent  candidates  who  have  been  repudiated 
at  the  primaries  from  securing  a  place  upon  the  general 
election  ballot. 

Section  5  of  the  Oregon  direct  primary  la\/:  "The  name  of  a 
candidate  of  any  political  party  as  defined  in  this  act,  shall  not 
be  printed  on  the  ballots  to  be  used  at  the  ensuing  election  unless 
such  candidate  be  selected  at  the  primary  election,  and  according 
to  the  methods  provided  for  in  this  act,  save  that  In  case  of  death 
after  nomination  at  such  primary  election,  and  not  otherwise,  a 
vacancy  so  caused  may  be  filled  by  the  officer  or  committee  so 
authorized  by  the  proper  party  rules  and  constitution,  on  his  or 
their  petition  to  the  county  clerk.  No  person  whose  name  has 
been  proposed  and  voted  on  as  that  of  a  candidate  for  nomination 
at  such  primary  election,  and  has  not  received  a  nomination 
thereby,  shall  be  nominated  as  a  candidate  for  public  office  at  the 
ensuing  election  In  any  other  manner." 

The  party  platform  and  party  organization  under  the  Oregon 

law. 

Section  13.  A  proposition,  within  the  meaning  of  this  act,  is  a 
statement  of  political  party  principle  or  policy,  or  a  resolution  or 
question  affecting  party  government  or  organization  or  administra- 
tion, submitted  by  petition  under  this  act  to  be  voted  upon  by  the 
voters,  members  of  the  party,  In  a  designated  electoral  district. 
Every  proposition  shall  be  so  framed  as  to  occupy  the  smallest 
possible  space  on  the  ballot,  and  at  the  same  time  express  clearly 
Its  intended  meaning;  it  shall  be  brief  and  concise  In  terms,  shall 
cover  a  single  point  or  question,  and  shall  not  exceed  fifty  words 
in  length.  Every  proposition  shall  be  printed  on  the  ballot  in 
nonpareil  type,  and  shall  be  so  placed  on  the  ballot  as  to  leave  a 
space  at  its  left  in  which  shall  be  written  the  woids  "Yes"  and 
"No,"  the  latter  word  directly  below  the  former,  both  of  which 
words  shall  be  numbered  consecutively  as  are  the  names  of  candi- 
dates, the  voter's  marks  to  be  made  between  the  words  and  their 
respective  numbers,  and  just  above  the  first  proposition  printed  on 
each  ticket  shall  be  printed  the  direction,  "Vote  yes  or  no."  A 
majority  of  the  votes  cast  for  and  against  each  proposition  shall 
determine  its  adoption  or  rejection.  If  a  ballot  shall  exhibit  a  vote 
for  two  Inconsistent  propositions,  it  shall  be  counted  for  neither. 

Petitions  under  the  Oregon  law. 

Section  21.  •  •  •  Names  and  propositions  shall  be  printed  on 
such  ballots  on  petition  of  Individual  electors  of  the  respective 
parties,  designating  the  name  of  the  candidate,  his  residence,  with 
street  and  number,  if  any,  the  nomination  or  party  office  or  honor 
sought  by  the  candidate,  and  the  party  ticket  or  column.  In  not 
over  three  words,  in  which  the  name  or  proposition  Is  to  bo 
printed,  each  petition  to  be  filed  on  behalf  of  a  single  name  or 
proposition.    Every  such  petition  shall  be  signed  by  electors,  mem- 


436  Aj>pendix. 

bers  of  the  party,  sucTT  membership  being  certified  and  sworn  to 
in  the  petition,  in  number  equal  to  at  least  five  (5)  per  centum  of 
the  vote  polled  at  the  last  general  election  by  the  party  in  whose 
ticket  the  name  or  proposition  is  to  be  printed,  for  its  candidates 
receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes,  in  the  electoral  district  in 
which  such  name  or  proposition  is  to  be  voted  upon,  in  case  the 
party  in  whose  ticket  such  name  or  proposition  is  to  be  printed  is 
a  political  party  as  defined  in  this  act.  Otherwise  such  petition 
shall  be  signed  by  electors  in  number  equal  to  at  least  one-half 
of  one  per  c'entum  of  the  total  vote  cast  at  the  preceding  general 
election  In  the  electoral  district  for  which  such  petition  is  pre- 
sented. Each  elector  signing  a  petition  shall  add  to  his  signature, 
his  place  of  residence  with  street  and  number,  if  any,  and  each 
elector  shall  be  qualified  to  subscribe  to  only  one  such  petition  for 
each  nomination  or  party  office  or  honor  or  proposition  covering 
the  same  point,  and,  in  so  signing  such  petition  or  petitions,  shall 
act  as  a  member  of  but  one  party. 


THE  STEVENS  DIRECT  PRIMARY  BILL  OE 

WISCONSIN.! 

The  people  of  the  State  of  Wisconsin,  represented  in  senate 
and  assevibly,  do  enact  as  follows: 

Section  1.  Hereafter,  all  candidates  to  be  voted  for  by  the  people, 
except  those  for  village,  town  and  school  district  offices,  shall  be 
nominated  either  at  a  primary  election,  held  in  accordance  with 
this  act,  or  by  petition  in  accordance  with  subdivision  3  of  section 
30  and  section  32,  statutes  of  1898.  This  act  shall  not  apply  to  special 
elections  to  fill  vacancies  nor  to  judicial  elections,  except  those  for 
justices  of  the  peace  and  police  justices. 

Section  2.  Primary  elections  shall  be  held  at  the  regular  pollings- 
place  in  each  election  precinct  in  this  state,  on  the  first  Tuesday 
In  September,  1902,  and  biennially  thereafter,  for  the  purpose  of 
nominating  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  the  next  general  elec- 
tion, and  shall  likewise  be  held  for  the  purpose  of  nominating 
candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  any  city  election,  at  least  two 
weeks  before  the  date  of  holding  such  election. 

Section  3.  On  or  before  sixty  days  prior  to  tae  holding  of  any  such 
primary  election,  preliminary  to  a  general  election,  the  secretary  of 
state  shall  make  out  and  iransmlt  a  notice  thereof  in  writing,  to 
each  county,  town,  village  and  city  clerk,  and  designate  therein  the 
offices  for  which  candidates  for  nomination  are  to  be  voted  for  at 
such  election.  Upon  receipt  of  such  notice,  each  county  clerk  shall 
forthwith  publish  once  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  applicable  to  his 
county,  in  one  newspaper  of  general  circulation  published  therein, 
in  the  interests  of  each  of  the  two  political  parties  that  cast  the 
largest  vote  in  said  county  at  the  preceding  general  election,  and 
each  town,  village  and  city  clerk  shall  forthwith  cause  notice  of  the 
holding  of  such  election  to  be  posted  in  three  public  places  in  each 

1  As  returned  from  the  Committee  on  Privileges  and  Elections. 


Stevens  Primary  Election  Bill  of  IVisGonsin.     487 

election  precinct  In  his  town,  village  or  city,  stating-  therein 
the  time  when  and  place  where  such  primary  election  will  be  held 
in  each  precinct  therein.  In  the  case  of  city  elections,  the  city  clerk 
shall  make  one  publication  of  such  notice  in  a  newspaper  of  gen- 
eral circulation  published  in  the  interests  of  each  of  the  two 
leading  political  parties  therein,  and  shall  also  cause  such  notice 
to  be  posted  in  three  public  places  in  each  election  precinct  therein, 
such  publication  and  posting  to  be  at  least  four  weeks  before  any 
such  primary  election.  Each  county  clerk,  before  the  first  Monday 
of  June,  1902,  and  biennially  thereafter,  shall  transmit  to  the  secre- 
tary of  state  the  name  and  postoffice  address  of  each  town,  city  and 
village  clerk  In  his  county. 

Section  4.  The  name  of  no  candidate  shall  be  printed  upon  an 
official  ballot  at  any  primary  election,  preliminary  to  a  general  elec- 
tion, unless  at  least  thirty  days  prior  thereto  there  be  filed  in  his 
behalf  a  nomination  paper  or  papers,  stating  his  name,  residence, 
with  street  and  number,  if  any,  the  office  for  which  he  is  a  candi- 
date, the  party  or  principle  he  proposes  to  represent  and  no  other. 
Such  paper  shall  In  all  cases  be  signed  by  at  least  two  per  cent. 
(2%)  of  the  voters  of  the  party  or  organization  named  and  proposed 
to  be  represented  therein.  In  the  state  or  the  political  subdivision 
thereof  as  the  case  may  be,  for  which  such  person  Is  proposed  as 
a  candidate.  In  case  of  candidates  for  state  offices,  the  electors 
signing  shall  be  distributed  over  and  reside  In  at  least  twenty  (20) 
counties  of  the  state,  and  be  at  least  two  per  cent.  (2%)  of  the 
party  vote  in  each  such  county;  in  case  of  candidates  for  congress, 
the  electors  signing  shall  be  distributed  over  and  reside  In  at  least 
one-fifth  (1-5)  of  the  election  precincts  in  at  least  one-half  (Vz)  of  the 
counties  In  that  congressional  district,  each  such  election  precinct 
being  represented  by  at  least  two  per  cent.  (2%)  of  the  party  vote 
therein;  in  case  of  candidates  for  the  state  senate  and  the  assembly, 
or  for  county  and  city  offices,  the  electors  signing  shall  be  distrib- 
uted over  and  reside  In  at  least  one-third  (1-3)  of  the  election  pre- 
cincts In  each  such  district,  county  or  city,  and  shall  constitute 
at  least  two  per  cent.  (2%)  of  the  voters  of  such  party  in  each  such 
district,  county,  city  or  voting  precinct,  as  the  case  may  be.  Pro- 
vided that  any  political  organization,  which,  at  the  last  preceding 
general  election  was  represented  on  the  official  ballot  by  either 
regular  partj'  candidates  or  by  Individual  nominees  only,  may, 
upon  complying  with  the  provisions  of  this  act,  have  a  separate 
primary  election  ticket  as  a  political  party,  if  any  of  its  said 
candidates  or  Individual  nominees  received  one  per  cent.  (1%)  of 
the  total  vote  cast  at  such  preceding  general  election  in  the  stale 
or  subdivision  thereof  in  which  the  candidate  seeks  the  nomina- 
tion. The  basis  of  such  percentage  in  each  case  shall  be  the  vote 
of  the  party  for  its  candidate  receiving  the  largest  vote  at  the  pre- 
ceding general  election  in  such  state,  county  or  other  subdivision 
thereof.  In  the  case  of  petitions  filed  for  non-partisan  candidates, 
the  petition  shall  contain  at  least  four  per  cent.  (4%)  of  the  total 
vote  cast  at  the  last  preceding  general  election  in  the  state  or  sub- 
division thereof,  in  which  the  person  is  a  candidate,  such  signers 
to  be  distributed  in  each  case  as  required  by  the  provisions  of  this 
section. 


488  Appendix. 

Section  5.  Each  signer  to  a  nomination  paper  shall  add  to  his 
signature  his  business  and  residence,  his  street  and  number,  xf 
any,  and  declare  in  such  nomination  paper,  that  he  intends  to 
support  the  candidate  named  therein.  For  all  nominations,  except 
state  officers,  there  shall  be  separate  nomination  papers  for  each 
election  precinct,  and  all  signers  on  each  separate  nomination 
paper  shall  reside  in  the  same  precinct.  For  state  officers,  there 
shall  be  separate  nomination  papers  for  each  county,  and  all 
signers  on  each  separate  nomination  paper  shall  reside  in  the 
same  county.  The  affidaA'it  of  a  qualified  elector  shall  be  appended 
to  each  such  nomination  paper  stating  that  he  is  personally  ac- 
quainted with  all  persons  who  have  signed  the  same,  that  he 
knows  them  to  be  electors  of  that  precinct  or  county,  as  the  nomi- 
nation paper  shall  require,  and  that  their  residence  and  business 
are  properly  stated  therein.  Such  affidavit  shall  not  be  made  by 
the  candidate,  but  each  candidate  shall  file  with  his  nomination 
paper  or  papers  a  declaration  that  he  will  qualify  as  such  officer 
if  nominated  and  elected. 

Section  6.  All  nomination  papers  pertaining  to  state  officers,  mem- 
bers of  congress,  state  senate  or  assembly,  shall  be  filed  in  the 
office  of  the  secretary  of  state;  to  county  officers,  in  the  office  of  the 
county  clerk;  to  city  officers.  In  the  office  of  the  city  clerk. 

Section  7.  At  least  twenty-flve  days  before  any  primary  election 
preceding  a  general  election  the  secretary  of  state  shall  transmit 
to  each  county  clerk  a  certified  list  containing  the  name  and  post- 
office  address  of  each  person  entitled  to  be  voted  for  as  a  candi- 
date in  his  county,  at  the  ensuing  primary  election,  together  with 
a  designation  of  the  office  and  the  party  or  principle  which  he  rep- 
resents. Such  clerk  shall  before  the  twentieth  day  preceding  suc,»i 
primary  election  make  one  publication  of  a  notice  of  such  primary 
election,  which  notice  shall  contain  a  complete  list  of  all  candi- 
dates to  be  voted  for  in  the  county,  giving  the  name  and  address 
of  each,  under  the  tHle  of  the  office  for  which  he  is  a  candidate, 
the  party  name  in  large  type,  the  date  of  the  election,  the  hours 
during  which  the  polls  will  be  open,  and  that  the  election  will  be 
held  at  the  regular  polling  places  In  each  precinct.  Such  notice 
shall  also  be  published  a  second  time,  the  week  preceding  such 
primary  election.  Such  publications  to  be  in  one  newspaper  of  the 
county  of  general  circulation  representing  each  of  the  two  parties 
that  polled  the  largest  vote  in  the  county  at  the  preceding  general 
election.  At  the  time  of  the  first  publication,  the  county  clerk  shall 
forthwith  mail  such  notice  to  each  town,  village  and  city  clerk  of 
his  county,  who  shall  immediately  upon  receipt  of  the  same,  post 
copies  of  such  notice  in  at  least  three  public  places  In  each  pre- 
cinct of  his  town,  village  or  city,  designating  therein  the  location 
of  the  polling  booth  In  each  election  precinct. 

Section  8.  On  the  twentieth  day  before  any  primary  election,  pre- 
ceding any  general  election,  each  county  clerk  shall  prepare  a 
sample  official  primary  election  ballot,  placing  thereon  the  names 
of  all  candidates  to  be  voted  for  in  any  precinct  of  his  county,  for 
whom  nomination  papers  have  been  filed.  He  shall  forthwith  sub- 
mit the  ticket  of  each  party  to  the  county  chairman  thereof,  and 
mail  a  copy  of  the  ballot  to  each  candidate  whose  name  appears 


Stevens  Primary  Election  Bill  of  Wisconsin.    489 

thereon,  at  his  address  as  given  In  the  nomination  paper,  and  shall 
post  In  a  conspicuous  place  in  his  office  a  copy  of  such  ballot.  On 
the  ninth  day  preceding  such  primary  election,  the  county  clerk 
shall  correct  any  errors  or  omissions  in  the  ballot,  cause  the  same 
to  be  printed  and  distributed  as  required  by  sections  41  and  44, 
statutes  of  189S,  in  the  case  of  ballots  at  a  general  election.  The 
number  of  ballots  shall  be  twice  the  number  of  votes  cast  in  each 
election  precinct  at  the  last  presidential  election.  The  county  clerk 
shall  send  with  the  ballots  copies  of  this  law,  to  be  furnished  him 
by  the  secretary  of  state. 

Section  9.  So  far  as  applicable  and  not  otherwise  provided  herein, 
the  provisions  of  the  foregoing  sections  shall  apply  to  all  primary 
elections  held  to  nominate  candidates  for  any  city  office,  provided, 
that  nomination  papers  shall  be  filed  at  least  fifteen  (15)  days,  the 
list  of  candidates  posted  and  published  in  each  city  on  the  ninth 
day  and  the  official  ballots  printed  on  the  fourth  day  before  the 
date  of  holding  such  primary  election. 

Section  10.  In  any  case  where  the  publication  of  a  notice  cannot 
be  made  as  hereinbefore  required,  it  may  be  so  made  in  any  news- 
paper having  a  general  circulation  in  the  county  or  city  in  which 
the  notice  is  required  to  be  publislied. 

Section  11.  All  ballots,  blanks  and  other  supplies  to  be  used  at 
any  primary  election  shall  be  furnished  at  public  expense  by  the 
same  officers  who  are  now  required  to  prepare  the  official  ballot 
and  furnish  such  supplies  at  general  and  city  elections.  All  ex- 
penses Incurred  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  paid  out 
of  the  treasury  of  the  city,  county  or  state,  as  the  case  may  be,  in 
the  same  manner,  with  like  effect  and  by  the  same  officers  as  in  the 
case  of  general  and  city  elections,  provided,  that  the  cost  of  pub- 
lishing any  notice  required  by  this  act  shall  not  exceed  the  fees 
fixed  by  section  4275,  statutes  of  1898,  for  legal  notices.  There  shall 
be  no  other  publications  than  tnose  provided  for  in  sections  3  and 
7  of  this  act.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  secretary  of  state  and 
of  the  respective  city  and  county  clerks  to  take  the  proper  steps,  as 
now  provided  by  law  in  relation  to  general  and  city  elections,  to 
have  the  name  of  every  person  nominated  at  a  primary  election 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  for  the  next  ensuing  general  or  city 
election. 

Section  12.  All  primary  elections  shall  be  under  the  supervision 
of  the  same  officers  that  have  charge  of  general  and  city  elections. 
All  inspectors,  ballot  clerks  and  clerks  of  election  for  any  primary, 
general  or  city  election  shall  be  chosen  or  appointed  as  provided 
by  section  47,  statutes  of  1SP8,  which  said  section  is  hereby  amended 
so  that  all  such  election  officers  shall  be  chosen  or  appointed  in 
the  same  manner  as  therein  provided,  except  that  such  choice  shall 
be  made  at  a  corresponding  time  in  the  month  of  August  instea.d  of 
September,  as  therein  now  provided.  The  ballot  clerks  shall  per- 
form the  duties  prescribed  by  section  50,  statutes  of  1898.  The 
clerks  of  election  shall  keep  a  poll  list  of  all  persons  voting,  and 
perform  such  other  duties  as  the  inspectors  prescribe;  two  inspect- 
ors belonging  to  two  different  political  parties  shall  have  charge 
of  the  registration  of  the  voters  and  the  other  Inspector  shall 
receive  and  deposit  the  ballots.  Each  clerk  and  inspector  shall 
take  the  oath  prescribed  in  section  48,  statutes  of  1898, 


490  Appendix. 

Section  13.  At  all  primary  elections  there  shall  be  an  Australian 
ballot  made  up  of  the  several  tickets  herein  provided  for,  all  of 
which  shall  be  securely  fastened  together  at  the  top,  provided 
that  there  shall  be  as  many  separate  tickets  as  there  are  parties 
entitled  to  participate  in  said  primary  election.  There  shall  also  be  a 
non-partisan  ticket  upon  which,  under  the  appropriate  title  of  each 
office,  shall  be  printed  the  names  of  all  persons  for  whom  nomi- 
nation papers  shall  have  been  filed  as  required  by  this  act,  who  are 
not  designated  on  such  nomination  papers  as  candidates  of  any 
political  party,  as  defined  by  section  4  of  this  act.  The  names 
of  all  candidates  shall  be  arranged  alphabetically  according  to 
surname  under  the  appropriate  title  of  the  respective  offices  and 
under  the  proper  party  designation  upon  the  party  ticket  or  upon 
the  non-partisan  ticket,  as  the  case  may  be.  The  ballots  with  the 
endorsements  shall  be  In  substantially  the  annexed  forms,  pro- 
vided, that  ballots  for  any  city  election  may  be  varied  as  to  the 
title  of  the  offices  to  be  printed  thereon,  so  as  to  conform  to  the 
law  under  which  each  such  election  is  held.  On  receiving  his  ballot 
at  any  such  primary  election,  the  elector  shall  forthwith,  without 
leaving  the  polling  place,  retire  alone  to  one  of  the  booths  or  com- 
partments to  prepare  the  same  by  marking  in  the  square  at  th« 
right  of  the  name  of  the  person  or  persons  for  whom  he  wishes  to 
vote  a  cross,  thus:  (X)  If  he  wishes  to  vote  for  a  person  whose 
name  is  not  on  the  ballot,  he  must  write  such  name  in  the  blank 
space  provided  for  that  purpose,  and  no  cross  (X)  need  be  placed 
after  the  name  so  written.  An  elector  may  use  or  copy  an  unofficial 
sample  ballot,  provided  the  same  is  not  printed  upon  paper  of 
the  color  or  quality  of  the  official  ballot.  After  preparing  his  bal- 
lot, the  elector  shall  fold  it  so  that  its  face  will  be  concealed  and 
the  printed  indorsement  and  signatures  or  initials  thereon  seen, 
and  vote  the  same  forthwith  before  leaving  the  polling  place.  On 
any  primary  election  day  the  polls  in  each  precinct  in  any  city 
shall  be  open  from  six  o'clock  in  the  morning  until  nine  o'clock 
in  the  evening,  in  all  other  pricincts,  the  polls  shall  be  open  fronn 
eight  o'clock  in  the  morning  to  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening. 

Section  14.  The  name  of  no  candidate  shall  be  printed  on  the  pri- 
mary election  ballot  unless  the  nomination  paper  or  papers  re- 
quired by  this  act  be  filed  in  his  behalf,  but  any  elector  may 
vote  for  any  other  person  by  writing  his  name  in  the  space  provided 
on  such  ballot  under  any  office.  If  any  elector  write  upon  his? 
ticket  the  name  of  any  person  who  Is  a  candidate  for  the  same 
office  on  some  other  ticket  than  that  upon  which  his  name  is  so 
written,  the  ballot  shall  be  counted  for  such  person  only  as  a 
candidate  of  the  party  upon  whose  ticket  his  name  is  written  and 
shall  in  no  case  be  counted  for  such  person  as  a  candidate  upon 
any  other  ticket.  In  case  a  person  is  nominated  on  more  than 
one  ticket  he  shall  forthwith  file  with  the  proper  officer  a  written 
declaration  indicating  the  designation  under  which  his  name  is 
to  be  printed  on  the  official  ballot.  The  name  of  no  person  shall 
be  placed  on  th<"  official  ballot  used  at  any  general  or  city  election 
unless  he  shall  have  been  nominated  as  provided  in  this  act,  but 
any  elector  may  write  on  his  ballot  the  name  of  any  person  for 
whom  he  desires  to  vote,  as  now^  provided  by  law.  Nomination?: 
may  be  declined  as  provided  in  section  34,  statutes  of  1898.    Vacan- 


Stevens  Primary  Election  Bill  of  Wisconsin.     491 

cies  occurring  after  the  holding  of  any  primary  election  shall  be 
filled  by  the  party  committee  of  the  city,  county,  district  or  state, 
as  the  case  may  be. 

Section  15.  No  person,  except  as  hereinafter  provided,  shall  b© 
entitled  to  vote  at  a  primary  election  unless  duly  registered. 
Every  primary  election  day  and  the  Monday  next  preceding  it 
shall  be  registration  days  on  which  the  inspectors  shall  exercise 
the  powers  prescribed  by  sections  25  and  26,  statutes  of  1S98.  except 
that  no  person  shall  be  registered  on  or  after  the  day  of  holding 
a  primary  election  without  personally  appearing  before  the  inspect- 
ors. The  Inspectors  shall  register  any  person  who  shall  on  any 
registration  day  file  an  affidavit  or  affirmation  from  which  it  ap- 
pears that  he  is  a  qualified  voter  in  such  election  precinct.  Any 
person  registering  on  either  of  the  said  days  as  prescribed  herein, 
if  otherwise  a  legal  voter,  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  at  the  ensuing 
general  or  city  election  without  other  registration.  There  shall 
be  no  other  registration  day  or  days  for  either  a  primary,  general 
or  city  election,  except  that  prescribed  by  section  27  of  the  statutes 
of  1898.  No  voter  shall  be  required  to  register  under  the  pro- 
visions of  this  act  in  any  election  precinct  where  registration  is 
not  now  required  by  law.  The  inspectors  shall  be  in  session  for 
the  purpose  of  registration  from  nine  o'clock  in  the  morning  until 
eight  o'clock  in  the  evening,  except  that  on  the  day  of  holding  pri- 
mary election,  and  on  that  day  from  six  o'clock  in  the  morning 
until  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening.  No  inspector  or  clerk  shall  be 
paid  to  exceed  three  dollars  as  compensation  for  his  services  on 
any  registration,  primary,  general,   or  city  election  day. 

Section  16.  The  party  committee  of  each  election  precinct  herein- 
after provided  for,  may  appoint  in  writing  over  their  signatures, 
two  party  agents  or  representatives,  with  an  alternate  for  each, 
who  shall  act  as  challengers  for  their  respective  parties,  and  have 
the  powers  prescribed  by  section  46,  statutes  of  1898.  The  chairman 
of  each  party  committee  shall  represent  his  party  in  the  polling- 
booth  of  his  precinct  during  the  canvass  and  return  of  the  vote, 
but  he  shall  not  act  as  an  officer  of  a  primary  election. 

Section  17.  In  canvassing  the  vote  the  officers  of  the  election  shall' 
proceed  in  the  manner  prescribed  in  section  76,  statutes  of  1898,  so 
far  as  the  same  is  applicable.  They  shall  put  aside  and  not  count 
for  any  candidate  any  ballot  upon  which  an  elector  has  attempted 
to  vote  for  candidates  upon  more  than  one  ticket  of  such  ballot. 
The  inspectors  of  election  in  each  precinct  shall  make  a  duplicate 
list  of  the  candidates  voted  for  upon  each  ticket  used  at  such  pri- 
mary election,  giving  thereon  a  full  and  accurate  return  of  the 
votes  cast  for  each  candidate.  The  chairman  of  each  party  pre- 
cinct committee  shall  certify  upon  each  duplicate  return  relating- 
to  his  party,  that  the  same  is  an  accurate  and  full  return  of  all 
votes  cast  by  his  party.  The  inspectors  shall  forthwith  send  one 
copy  of  the  return  as  to  each  political  party  to  the  county  chair- 
man of  that  political  party  and  also  deliver  or  send  all  returns? 
to  the  county  clerk,  if  a  primary  election  preceding  a  general 
election,  or  to  the  city  clerk,  if  a  city  election.  The  person  deliver- 
ing such  return  shall  receive  the  compensation  provided  by  sec- 
tion 78,    statutes  of  1898,   and  be  liable  for  neglect  to   deliver  th© 


492  Aj)pendix. 


same  as  provided  In  section  79,  statutes  of  1898.  Provided  always 
that  such  returns  shall  be  sent  by  express  or  registered  mail  where 
practicable. 

Section  18.  The  vote  at  a  primary  election  shall  be  canvassed  In 
the  following  manner:  If  for  a  single  precinct  by  the  inspectors 
therein;  if  for  a  district  having  more  than  one  precinct,  and 
wholly  within  any  ward,  city  or  county,  the  canvass  shall  be  made 
from  the  returns  provided  for  by  section  17,  by  the  county  clerk 
and  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  county  committee  of  each 
political  party  having  a  regularly  organized  committee  therein, 
if  the  primary  election  be  preliminary  to  a  general  election,  or  by 
the  city  clerk  and  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  party  city  com- 
mittees, if  preliminary  to  a  city  election.  Such  board  of  canvassers 
shall  meet  at  eleven  o'clock  in  the  forenoon  of  the  third  day  (Fri- 
day) succeeding  such  primary  election  at  the  office  of  the  county 
or  city  clerk,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  proceed  to  canvass  the  vote 
substantially  as  provided  by  section  82,  statutes  of  1898.  They 
shall  make  and  certify  duplicate  returns  as  to  the  votes  cast  for 
the  candidates  voted  for  wholly  within  the  limits  of  any  ona 
county  and  forthwith  certifiy  and  file  one  complete  return  with  tha 
cfity  or  county  clerk,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  immediately  deliver 
so  much  of  the  other  as  relates  to  each  party  to  the  respective 
party  county  chairmen.  They  shall  also  make  an  additional  dupli- 
cate return  In  the  same  form  showing  the  votes  cast  for  each 
candidate  not  voted  for  wholly  within  the  limits  of  any  one  county. 
The  county  clerk  shall  forthwith  send  to  the  secretary  of  state 
by  registered  mail  or  express,  one  complete  copy  of  all  returns  as 
to  such  candidates.  The  county  clerk  shall  likewise  send  the 
chairman  of  the  state  central  committee  of  each  party  a  duplicate 
copy  of  the  returns  last  described  relating  to  the  candidates  of 
each  such  party. 

Section  19.  The  vote  for  all  candidates  not  to  be  voted  for  wholly 
within  the  limits  of  any  one  county  shall  be  canvassed  from  the 
returns  provided  for  in  section  18  by  the  secretary  of  state  and 
the  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  state  central  committee  of  each 
political  party  in  the  state,  who  shall  meet  for  that  purpose  In 
the  office  of  the  secretary  of  state  at  twelve  o'clock  noon  on 
Tuesday  one  week  after  each  primary  election  preliminary  to  a 
general  election.  They  shall  make  and  certify  duplicate  returns 
showing  the  vote  cast  for  each  such  candidate  and  forthwith  file  a 
complete  copy  of  the  same  in  the  office  of  the  secretary  of  state 
and  deliver  to  the  chairman  of  the  state  central  committee  of 
each  political  party  a  certifiLj  statement  of  all  votes  cast  for  the 
candidates  of  the  political  party  represented  by  such  chairman. 
In  case  of  the  failure  of  any  county  clerk  to  forward  the  returns 
as  required  by  this  act,  the  secretary  of  state  shall  forthwith  pro- 
cure the  missing  return  as  provided  in  section  94,  statutes  of  1898. 
Section  20.  In  all  cases  the  person  upon  any  ticket  receiving  the 
largest  number  of  votes  for  any  office  shall  be  declared  the  candi- 
date of  his  par.y  for  such  office.  In  case  of  a  tie  vote,  the  tie 
s-hall  forthwith  be  determined  by  lot  by  the  canvassers.  Upon  the 
canvass  of  the  votes  that  determine  the  nomination  of  any  candi- 
date, it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  city  or  county  clerk  or  secretary  of 


Stevens  Primary  Election  Bill  of  Wisconsin.     493 

state,  as  the  case  may  be,  to  forthwith  give  notice  of  such  fact  In 
writing  to  the  person  nominated.  When  filed  with  any  public  of- 
ficer, any  such  return  shall  at  all  times  be  open  to  the  inspection 
of  the  public.  No  public  officer  shall  be  entitled  to  any  additional 
compensation  for  performing  any  duty  required  by  this  act  and 
no  member  or  ofilcer  of  any  political  committee  shall  receive  any 
compensation  from  the  public  for  the  services  required  by  this 
act  or  for  expenses  incurred  in  the  performance  of  the  same. 

Section  21.  The  platform  of  each  political  party  shall  be  form- 
ulated in  such  manner  as  the  state  central  committee  of  each  party 
shall  determine.  The  congressional  committee  of  each  rlistrict 
may  meet  with  the  nominee  at  the  call  of  its  chairman  after  the 
nomination  has  been  declared,  and  formulate  a  platform  for  such 
congressional  nominee  and  district. 

Section  22.  A  party  committee  of  three  for  each  precinct  shall 
be  chosen  In  each  election  precinct  at  the  primary  election  preced- 
ing each  general  election.  Each  voter  may  write  in  the  space  left 
on  his  ticket  for  that  purpose  the  names  of  not  to  exceed  three 
qualified  electors  of  the  precinct.  The  three  having  the  highest 
number  of  votes  shall  constitute  such  committee  and  the  one  hav- 
ing the  largest  vote  shall  be  chairman.  In  case  of  a  tie,  the  choice 
shall  forthwith  be  decided  by  lot  by  the  inspectors  in  such  manner 
as  they  may  determine.  The  official  return  made  by  the  inspectors 
shall  show  the  names  and  the  addresses  of  each  party  committee- 
man chosen. 

Section  23.  The  party  committee  of  each  city  and  county  and  of 
each  assembly  district  shall  consist  of  the  party  chairman  of  each 
precinct  in  such  city,  county  or  district;  the  state  senatorial  dis- 
trict committee,  of  the  chairmen  of  the  assembly  committees  in 
such  senatorial  district;  the  congressional  committees,  of  the  party 
chairmen  of  the  senatorial  district  committees  of  the  districts 
wholly  or  partially  in  such  congressional  districts;  the  state  cen- 
tral committee,  of  the  party  chairman  in  each  county  of  the  state. 
Each  city,  county  and  state  central  committee  shall  choose  by 
ballot  its  chairman  and  an  executive  committee  of  not  to  exceed 
seven  members.  Such  officers  and  committeemen  for  each  ensuing 
campaign  shall  be  chosen  at  a  Joint  meeting  of  the  candidates 
nominated  and  of  the  party  committee  for  the  city,  county  or  state, 
as  the  case  may  be,  each  candidate  having  one  vote  in  the  selec- 
tion of  such  officers  and  committeemen.  The  chairman  and  execu- 
tive committee  of  each  such  committee  shall  elect  a  secretary 
and  a  treasurer  who  shall  hold  office  till  their  successors  are  se- 
lected and  accept  office.  Each  candidate  for  congress,  state  senate 
or  assembly  shall,  immediately  upon  his  nomination,  select  a 
chairman,  a  secretary,  a  treasurer  and  an  executive  committee 
for  his  respective  party  district  committee.  Every  chairman,  sec- 
retary, treasurer  and  member  of  an  executive  committee  shall  be 
a  member  of  their  respective  committees  and  have  one  vote  in  the 
decision  of  all  questions  by  the  committee.  Each  such  chairman, 
secretary,  treasurer  or  executive  committeeman  shall  hold  office 
until  a  new  party  committee  is  elected  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  this  act,  or  until  his  successor  is  elected  and  accepts 
office.     Each    committee    and    its    officers    shall    have   the    powers 


494:  Appendix. 


usually  exercised  by  such  committees  and  by  the  officers  thereof, 
in  so  far  as  consistent  with  this  act.  The  various  officers  and 
committees  now  in  existence  shall  exercise  the  powers  and  possess 
the  duties  herein  prescribed  until  their  successors  are  chosen  in 
accordance  with  this  act.  In  all  meetings  of  said  city,  county  or 
assembly  district  committees,  each  precinct  chairman  shall  have 
one  vote  for  every  fifty  votes  or  major  fraction  thereof  cast  by 
his  party  in  his  precinct  at  the  last  general  election,  each  such 
chairman  to  have  at  least  one  vote;  and  in  all  meetings  of  the 
state  central  committee,  each  county  chairman  shall  have  one 
vote  for  every  two  hundred  and  fifty  ballots  or  major  fraction 
thereof  cast  by  his  party  in  his  county  at  the  last  preceding  presi- 
dential election,  to  be  determined  as  provided  in  section  5  above, 
each  chairman  to  have  at  least  one  vote. 

Section  24.  Whenever  any  party  precinct  chairman  cannot  exer- 
cise the  powers  and  perform  the  duties  required  of  him  by  this 
act,  such  dtities  shall  be  performed  by  a  member  of  his  party 
precinct  committee  to  be  designated  by  the  precinct  chairman 
or  chosen  by  lot.  If  the  chairman  of  any  other  party  committee 
shall  not  be  able  to  perform  the  duties  herein  required  of  him,  th  ■; 
secretary  of  such  committee  shall  exercise  the  powers  herein 
vested  in  such  chairman.  If  both  the  chairman  and  the  secretary 
are  unable  to  perform  such  duties,  they  shall  be  performed  by  a 
member  of  the  executive  committee  chosen  by  the  chairman,  or, 
if  the  cHairman  cannot  act,  by  the  secretary.  Any  vacancy  in  a 
party  precinct  committee  shall  be  filled  by  the  remaining  mem- 
bers of  such  committee;  any  vacancy  in  the  place  of  an  officer  of 
any  committee  shall  be  filled  in  the  same  manner  as  that  in  which 
such  officer  was  originally  chosen.  The  chairman  of  each  political 
cominittee  shall  call  a  meeting  thereof  when  necessary  or  when 
requested  by  one-fifth  of  the  members  of  such  committee,  reason- 
able notice  of  such  meeting  to  be  given. 

Sction  2.5.  Any  officer,  member  of  any  political  committee  or  other 
person  who  shall  wilfully  fail  or  neglect  to  perform  any  duty  by 
this  act  required  of  him,  or  who  shall  tamper  with,  change  or 
wrongfully  destroy  any  ballot,  return  or  certificate  of  election,  or 
wilfully  do  any  act,  the  object  of  which  is  to  change  or  wrongfully 
destroy  any  ballot  or  the  record  of  any  canvass  of  votes  or  in  any 
way  wilfully  to  interfere  with  the  utmost  honesty  and  fairness  in 
conducting  any  such  primary  election  or  in  making  nominations 
thereat,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and,  upon  trial 
and  conviction  thereof,  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
twenty-fi.ve  nor  more  than  two  thousand  dollars,  or  by  imprison- 
ment in  the  county  jail  not  less  than  sixty  days  nor  more  than 
one  year,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment. 

Section  26.  Any  person  who  shall  offer,  or  with  knowledge  of  the 
same  permit  any  person  to  offer  for  his  benefit,  any  bribe  or  promise 
of  gain  of  any  kind  in  the  nature  of  a  bribe  to  a  voter  to  induce  him 
to  sign  any  preliminary  nomination  paper  or  petition  for  nomina- 
tion, and  any  p  rson  who  shall  accept  any  such  bribe  or  promise 
of  gain  of  any  kind  in  the  nature  of  a  bribe  as  consideration  for 
signing  the  same,  whether  such  bribe  or  promise  of  gain  in  the 
nature  of  a  bribe  be  offered  or  accepted  before  or  after  such  sign- 


Stevens  Primary  Election  Bill  of  Wisconsin.     495 

ing,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and,  upon  trial  and  convic- 
tion thereof,  be  punislied  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty-five 
nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  of  not  less  than  ten  days  nor  more  than  six  months 
or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment.  If  any  candidate  shall 
be  convicted  of  any  such  offense,  the  name  of  such  candidate  shall 
be  stricken  from  the  official  primary  election  ballot,  or  if  the  con- 
viction occur  after  any  candidate  shall  be  ueclared  the  nominee 
of  his  party,  he  shall  forfeit  his  nomination  and  in  either  case 
such  nomination  shall  thereby  be  and  become  vacated  and  the 
place  filled  as  provided  in  section  14  above.  The  same  penalty  of 
forfeiture  shall  be  infl.icted  on  any  candidate  who  shall  participate 
in  any  corrupt  or  fraudulent  practices  at  such  primary  election, 
or  who  shall  connive  with  or  aid  and  abet  any  one  else  in  so 
doing,   for  the  purpose  of  securing  his  nomination  thereat. 

Section  27.  Any  act  declared  an  offense  by  the  general  laws  of 
this  state  concerning  elections  shall  also  in  like  case  be  an  offense 
in  all  primary  elections,  and  shall  be  punished  in  the  same  form 
and  manner  as  therein  provided;  and  all  the  penalties  and  provi- 
sions of  the  law  as  to  such  election,  except  as  herein  otherwise  pro- 
vided, shall  apply  in  such  case  with  equal  force  and  to  the  same 
extent  as  though  fully  set  forth  in  this  act. 

Section  28.  The  provisions  of  the  statutes  now  In  force  in  relation 
to  the  holding  of  elections,  the  solicitation  of  voters  at  the  polls, 
the  challenging  of  voters,  the  manner  of  conducting  elections,  of 
counting  the  ballots  and  making  return  thereof  and  of  other 
kindred  subjects  shall  apply  to  all  primary  elections  in  so  far  as 
they  are  consistent  with  this  act.  The  intent  of  this  act  being  to 
place  the  primary  election  under  the  regulation  and  protection  of 
the  laws  now  in  force  as  to  elections. 

Section  29.  All  acts  or  parts  of  acts  Inconsistent  with  or  in  conflict 
with  the  provisions  of  this  act  are  hereby  repealed. 

Section  30.  This  act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from  and 
after  the  first  day  of  May,  1901. 


INDEX. 


Adams,  John,  and  caucus  club,  4. 

Alabama,  primaries  in,  141. 

Amendment  to  California  Constitution, 
198. 

Arkansas,  primaries  in,  190. 

Appointment  to  office,  in  county,  435; 
in  city,  436;  in  State,  438. 

Assessment  of  candidates,  125,  127;  in 
Kentucky,  173. 

Attendance  at  poUs.  158,  185,  285-287. 

Ballot,  arrangement  of,  218,  236, 238, 406; 
separate,  197,  209,  238;  names  on,  278. 

Ballot  reform,  when  accomplished,  84; 
politician  and,  86;  scope  of,  87. 

Bills,  direct  primary,  introduced,  19C1, 
94;  in  Utah,  191;  in  Colorado,  182;  in 
North  Dakota,  180. 

Bossism,  extent  of,  90. 

Boston,  primaries  in,  102,  103;  caucus, 
law  of,  105. 

Britton  v.  Board,  Cal.  decision,  360. 

Bryant  bill  of  Wisconsin,  247. 

California,  amendment  to  Constitution, 
198;  court  decisions  in,  354;  early  pri- 
maries in,  148;  first  law  of,  147,  193; 
primary  laws  of,  196;  law  of  1901,  96, 
200;  primary  reform  in,  193;  test  for 
voting,  349;  weakness  of  law,  204. 

Candidates,  busy  class,  318;  concentra- 
tion of,  182;  in  Cleveland,  Ohio,  318; 
distribution  of,  307;  good,  321,  322; 
leisure  class,  318;  "machine,"  under 
direct  primary ;  modest,  320;  number 
of,  283;  nationaUty  of,  308;  in  Kansas, 
186;  lists  of,  when  pubUshed,  404; 
poor,  317;  representative,  285,  287;  re- 
quirements from,  278;  weak,  nomina- 
tion.of,  337,  363;  wealthy,  315, 316;  who 
may  run,  400. 

Canvass,  imder  closed  primaries,  408; 
under  open  primary,  408;  how  made, 
in  Mich.,  239. 
33 


Canvassing  board,  how  chosen  in  Mich., 
239;  salary  of,  239;  in  Minn.,  220;  un- 
der 111.  bill,  209;  under  Stevens  bill 
of  Wis.,  250,  251. 

Caucus,  corruption  in,  37-41;  devices 
for  control  of,  41;  definition  of,  34; 
importance  of,  36;  in  country,  38; 
origin  of,  4;  abolition  of,  3;  legaliza- 
tion of,  69;  lack  of  interest  in,  42;  con- 
trol of,  40. 

Caucus  laws,  early,  90;  inefficiency  of, 
7,  41,  70,  243. 

Challengers,  407. 

Chelsea,  direct  primaries  in,  102. 

Chicago,  civil  service  rules  in,  427. 

Cincinnati,  direct  primaries  in,  155. 

City,  appointive  offices  in,  436. 

City  government,  corruption  in,  824; 
reform,  doctrine  of,  325;  and  direct 
primaries,  324. 

City  voter,  advantage  of,  304;  relation 
to  country  voter,  305. 

Civil  service  reform,  419;  and  imperial- 
ism, 430;  in  England,  429;  in  United 
States,  430;  legislation  for,  426; 
method  of,  429;  principles  of,  432; 
rules  in  cities,  428. 

Clark  system  of  nomination,  71,  72. 

Cleveland  primaries,  155;  attendance 
at,  158,  286;  experience  with,  157,  389; 
and  factional  politics,  157. 

Closed  primary,  406;  bills  providing  for, 
335;  in  Minn.,  223;  practicability  of, 
a36;  under  Colby  bill  of  Mich.,  236; 
imder  Stevens  bill  of  Wis.,  250;  where 
used,  334.    See  also  Test. 

Colby  bUl  of  Mich.,  236. 

College,  American,  and  citizenship,  27; 
tjrpical,  Yale,  28. 

College  graduate  and  reform,  30;  ap- 
athy toward  wrongful  poUtics,  30;  in 
politics,  26. 


498 


Index. 


Colorado,  court  decision  in,  353;  direct 
primary  in,  183. 

Combinations,  political,  cause  of,  22;  in 
rural  districts,  23;  remedy  for,  31; 
strengtli  of,  23. 

Committee  of  credentials,  "  machine 
controUed,"  59. 

Concurrent  primaries,  122,  236,  400;  in 
Cal.,  197;  not  used  in  111.,  207;  in 
Mich..  237;  in  Minn.,  219;  in  Orep., 
2.33;  under  HI.  bill,  209;  under  Stevens 
bill  of  Wis.,  249. 

Conference,  national,  98;  committees, 
6;  system,  8. 

Congressional  caucus,  its  origin,  12;  its 
power,  14, 16;  its  influence,  10;  legacy 
of,  17;  protests  against,  13,  15. 

Constitutionahty  of  primary  laws,  352. 

Convention,  choice  of  candidates  in, 
50;  classes  of  delegates  in,  57;  early 
delegate,  9;  in  session,  20;  modern, 
transition  to,  17;  mixed,  15;  origin, 
7,  9;  party-disintegrating  forces  at, 
267,  268;  party  conciliation  in,  51; 
party  enthusiasm  in,  51 ;  party  suc- 
cess and,  50;  as  party  institution,  49; 
platform  of,  52;  pure,  48;  state,  8; 
school  of  politics,  53;  serves  all  par- 
ties, 53;  service  of,  49;  wins  favor,  8. 

Convention  system,  working  of,  19;  im- 
provement of,  91;  organization  of,  18; 
complexity  of,  21,  58. 

Corporations,  control  of  nomination 
by,  296;  increase  in,  296;  in  politics, 
294;  under  direct  primaries,  296. 

Correspondence  committees,  6,  7. 

Corrupt  practices  acts,  444-447, 

County,  appointive  offices  In,  435. 

Country  voter,  in  South,  129;  and  poli- 
tician, 306;  interest  of,  302,  304;  under 
convention  system,  303;  under  direct 
primary,  181;  in  Kansas,  185,  3f  ;  dis- 
advantages of,  304;  under  nominat- 
ing districts,  307;  under  Minn,  law, 
305. 

Court  decisions,  in  C!olo.,  Penn.,  N.  Y., 
Cal ,  Oreg.,  353. 

Crawford  county,  direct  vote  system 
of,  84;  inaugurated,  147;  experience 
with,  149,  388;  freedom  of,  150;  law 
for,  148. 


Delegates,  corrupt,  60;  how  corrupted, 
60;  instructed,  74;  uninstructed,  75; 
number  of,  58;  selection  of,  in  Oreg., 
227;  m  HI.,  206;  in  Wash.,  211;  in  Cal., 
200;  under  Stevens  bill,  250. 

Delaware  county.  Pa.,  primary  law  of, 

*  120;  nominations  in,  151. 

Democratic  party,  in  South,  122.  388. 

Development,  industrial,  25. 

Direct  nomination,  movement  toward, 
3;  expediency  of,  77;  advantages  of, 
74. 

Direct  primary,  argument  against,  393; 
advantages  of,  in  Ean.,  186;  attend- 
ance at,  185,  285;  corruption  under, 
181;  first,  84;  idea  of  the,  263;  in  1900, 
93;  opposition  to,  180,  182.  Optional 
in  Mo.,  177;  in  Neb.,  188;  in  South, 
121;  in  New  York,  110;  in  Ind.,  165: 
in  Ky.,  170;  in  Ohio,  155;  party-regu- 
lated, 183,  184,  390;  party  apostasy 
under,  275;  party  leaders  under,  276; 
aim  of,  262;  when  held,  399. 

Direct  primary  legislation,  diversity  of, 
87;  first,  84,  90;  imperfection  of.  261; 
passed  in  19U1,  96;  in  1899,  93;  model 
law,  397;  bills  introduced  1901,  94; 
opposition  to,  95;  interpretation  of, 
by  courts,  373. 

Direct  primary  reform,  74;  men  prose- 
cuting, 99;  nature  of,  99;  strength 
of,  97;  States  prosecuting  the,  94; 
progress  of,  91. 

Easley,  R.  M.,  Secy.  Civic  Federation, 
Chicago,  98. 

Educational  aristocracy,  78. 

Electors,  presidential,  loss  of  power, 
14. 

Elections,  authorized  by  law,  355,  374; 
frequency  of,  441. 

Ely,  R.  T.  theory  of  corporate  inter- 
ference in  politics,  294. 

Enrollment,  in  N.  Y.,  112;  in  Mass.,  107; 
in  Ky.,  170.    See  also  Rkqistration. 

Erie  county,  primaries  in,  153. 

Expense:  Court  decisions  on,  375;  of 
convention  system,  383,  384. 

Expense  of  primaries,  122,  379.  How 
met,  in  Cal.,  197;  in  Ky.,  173;  in  Hi., 
207;  in  Ind.,  167;  in  Mo.,  177,  178;  in 
Nebr.,  189;  In  Minn.,  222;  in  Nebr., 


Index. 


499 


188;  in  Oreg.,  235;  in  the  South,  125; 
under  Stevens  bill,  249. 

Factions  in  party  under  direct  primt^ 
ries,  186;  representation  of,  in  Miss.. 
142. 

Fee,  constitutionality  of,  282;  expedi- 
ency of,  279;  discrimination  of,  315. 
Required,  278;  in  111.,  209;  under 
Colby  bill,  236;  by  Minn,  law,  217;  in 
Oregon,  231;  under  direct  primary 
law  in  Mich.,  237. 

Florida,  direct  primaries  in,  140. 

General  election,  nature  of,  331. 

Greorgia,  direct  primaries  in,  139. 

Governor,  position  of,  in  State,  437. 

Grand  Rapids,  direct  primary  law  of, 
237. 

Gregory,  Charles  Noble,  on  corrupt 
practices  acts,  444. 

Hagemeister  bill  of  Wisconsin,  253;  un- 
constitutionality of,  256. 

Hatton  amendment  to  Stevens  bUl  of 
Wisconsin,  252. 

Hennepin  county,  primary  law  of,  215; 
success  of,  210. 

Hicks  direct  primary  bill  of  Minn.,  214. 

Hopkins,  John  S.,on  national  league, 98. 

Illinois  primaries,  corruption  in,  204; 
legislation  for,  205;  law  of  1899,  206; 
weakness  of  law,  209.  Direct  pri- 
mary bill  of  1901,  209;  prospects  of 
reform  in,  210. 

Independent  voter,  excluded  by  test, 
336;  in  city,  326;  independent  ticket 
imder  Oregon  law,  227. 

Indiana,  direct  primaries,  counties 
using,  163;  law  of  1901,  96, 165;  rules 
for,  163;  test  at,  349. 

Insley,  Edward,  on  conference,  98. 

Iowa,  primaries,  183. 

Jackson  county  (Kan.),  direct  primary, 
90,  183;  experiences  with,  307.  See 
also  Kansas. 

Kansas,  direct  primaries  in,  90, 183,  307; 
advantages  of,  187;  candidates  at,  283. 

Kentucky,  direct  primaries  in,  161 ;  at- 
tendance at,  286;  experience  with, 
390,  174;  enrollment  system  for,  170; 
law  for,  90;  law  of  1880,  169;  law  of 
1892,  170;  improvements  in  law  of 
1892,  171;  test  for  voting  at,  342. 


Lackawana  county.  Pa.,  direct  prima- 
ries in,  153. 

Ladd  V.  Holmes,  Oreg.  decision,  364, 
372. 

La  FoUette,  B.  M.,  as  primary  re- 
former, 97,  241 ;  addresses  of,  98,  245, 
246;  campaign  against,  257;  defeat  of, 
in  convention,  244;  annual  message 
of,  as  governor,  61 ;  veto  message  of, 
254;  and  Stevens  bill,  250. 

Lancaster  coimty.  Pa.,  first  primary 
law  of,  151 ;  Crawford  system  in,  150. 

Legislative  caucus,  decline  of,  15;  In- 
fluence of,  10;  last,  18;  legacy  of,  17; 
nomination  by,  12;  origin  of,  10. 

Lewis  bUl  of  Wis.,  245. 

Liberty,  false  notion  of,  40,  89. 

Lincoln,  Nebr.,  primaries  in,'189. 

Local  act,  what  constitutes  a,  376. 

Lockwood  act,  Oreg.,  constitutionaUty 
of,  372. 

Louisville  primaries,  attendance  at,  286. 

Louisiana,  primaries  in,  143. 

Machine,  and  civil  service  reform,  423; 
and  lower  classes,  299;  candidates  of, 
323;  cause  of,  24;  in  city,  325;  in  poli- 
tics, 294;  in  rural  districts,  23;  in 
South,  126;  in  Wis.,  95;  its  influence, 
263.  Opposition  of,  to  reform,  95;  in 
Minn.,  223;  in  Mich.,  237;  in  Wis.,  244, 
247,  248.  Place  of,  in  politics,  293; 
under  direct  primaries,  298,  300. 

Majority  nomination,  125;  at  conven- 
tion, 288;  experience  with,  284;  how 
secured,  290;  in  Nebr.,  189;  in  Miss., 
142;  in  S.  C,  135. 

Maryland,  direct  primaries  in,  120. 

Marsh  v.  Hanley,  Cal.  decision,  354. 

Massachusetts,  caucus  law  of,  103,  104; 
difficulty  with  law,  118;  civil  service 
law  of,  427;  primaries  in,  102;  stay- 
at-home  vote  in,  287. 

Meyer,  B.  H.,  advisory  councils,  295. 

Michigan,  primaries  in,  235;  Colby  bill 
of,  236;  law  of  1901,  237;  test  at,  349. 

Mills  caucus  law  of  Wis.,  242. 

Milwaukee,  civil  service  rules  in,  427. 

Minnesota  direct  primaries,  213 ;  country 
vote  under,  305;  attendance  at,  286; 
candidates  at,  284;  experience  with, 
391;  Hennepin  county  law,  215;  Hicks 


500 


Index. 


bill,  214;  law  of  1901,  96,  216;  party 
organization  under,  224;  Ives  amend- 
ment, 223;  open  primary  in,  343;  pub- 
licpressin,312;  test  forvoting, 219,350. 

Minority  nomination,  at  conventions, 
288;  under  direct  primaries,  277;  un- 
der "machine  "  politics,  288;  remedy 
for,  290,  291;  elections  in  Wis.,  289. 

Mississippi,  primaries  in,  141,  142. 

Missouri,  primaries  in,  175;  compulsory, 
90;  law  of  1901,  177. 

Municipal  government,  334. 

Nebraslca,  primaries  in,  187. 

Negro  voter,  in  South,  124. 

Nevada,  primaries  in,  191. 

New  England,  early  caucus  in,  5. 

New  Jersey,  primaries  in,  119. 

New  York,  civil  service  law  of,  426; 
court  decision  In,  353;  direct  primary 
in,  110;  enrollment  system,  112;  pri- 
mary law  of,  109,  110;  primary  regu- 
lations, 116;  stay-at-home  vote  in,  287; 
test  in,  350. 

Nominations,  methods  of,  6;  districts 
for,  307. 

Nomination  paper,  401 ;  expediency  of, 
in  South,  279;  in  South,  106;  in  Wis., 
281;  objection  to,  280;  under  Henne- 
pin county  law,  217;  under  Mich.,  bill, 
236 ;  when  filed,  403.  See  also  Petition. 

North  Carolina,  primaries  in,  136. 

North  Dakota,  primaries  in,  180. 

Notice  of  primary,  when  published,  400. 

Ohio  primaries,  candidate  at,  283,  318; 
law  for,  155;  changes  in  law,  158; 
turn  out  of  voters,  286;  press  and, 
312;  stay-at-home  vote  in,  287.  See 
also  Cleveland. 

One-man-power,  growth  of,  23;  opposi- 
tion to,  83;  solution  for,  83. 

Open  book  method  of  nomination,  TX 

Open  primary,  and  "machine"  con- 
trol, 300;  bills  providing  for,  335; 
constitutionality  of,  367;  in  Cal.,  198, 
359,  365;  in  Minn.,  219,  334;  in  Oreg., 
233,  234,  363,  365;  practicability  of, 
336;  proposed  form  of,  405;  trial  of, 
343;  under  111.  bill,  209;  under  Ste- 
vens bill,  250;  where  used,  334. 

Oregon,  direct  primary  in,  226;  scope 
of  law,  226;  court  decision,  354,  363; 
law  of  1901,  96,  230;  political  situation 
in  Oreg.,  365;  test  in,  349. 


Parties  under  direct  primaries:  Apos- 
tasy in,  275;  harmony  in  268;  in 
Kansas,  186;  leaders  of,  270;  service 
of,  49;  new  parties,  200;  responsi- 
bUity  of,  332. 

Parties,  weak:  Exclusion  of  3.39,361,.374. 
Discrimination  against,  360;  under 
test,  336. 

Parties  which  may  participate,  in 
Oreg.,  227;  in  Cal.,  200;  in  Minn.  216; 
in  111.,  207;  in  W^is.,  249. 

Party  committee,  election  of,  in  Miss., 
142;  in  Ind.,  165.  Power  of,  in  Ken- 
tucky, 171;  in  South,  125.  See  also 
Party  Oeganization. 

Party  organization,  maintenance  of, 
409,410;  in  Mo.,  179;  in  Mich.,  240;  in 
Minn.,  234;  In  Oreg.,  229;  under 
Stevens  bill  of  Wis.,  250.  In  cities, 
325;  "machine"  controlled,  265; 
strong,  264;  under  direct  primaries, 
265,  266,  276.  See  also  Party  Com- 
mittee. 

Pasters,  use  of,  405;  in  Cal.,  203. 

Patronage,    influence  of,  420-435. 

Personal  politics,  in  South,  127;  evils 
of,  128. 

Petition,  merits  of,  316;  required  in  HI. 
bill,  209;  under  Oreg.  law,  231.  See 
also  Nomination  Paper. 

Pennsylvania,  court  decision  in,  353; 
Crawford  system,  147:  Delaware 
county  primaries,  151;  Erie  county 
primaries,  153;  first  law  in,  151;  Lack- 
awanna county  primaries,  153;  Lan- 
caster coimty  primaries,  150;  local 
laws  of,  81;  stay-at-home  vote  in,  287. 

Philadelphia,  civil  service  rules  in,  437; 
first  convention  at,  118. 

Platform,  how  framed,  269,270,409;  in 
South,  127;  framed  by  candidates, 
270;  by  convention,  273;  by  state 
central  committee,  271;  proposed 
plan  for  formulation  of,  373;  under, 
Oreg.  law,  230;  under  Stevens  bill- 
350. 

Polls  open,  time  of,  407;  in  m.,  208;  in 
Mo.,  178;  in  Mich.,  338;  in  Oreg., 
228,233. 

Press,  in  Cleveland,  310;  in  Jlinn.  and 
Wis.,  312;  mission  of,  313. 

Primary:  Corrupt,  cause  of,  88;  rem- 
edy for,   91 ;  and  ballot  reform,  88; 


Index. 


601 


Increase  of  corruption,  89,  91 ;  extra- 
legal and  corruption,  39.  Control  of, 
88;  definition  of,  35;  Importance  of, 
36;  in  South,  121;  party  regulated, 
89. 

Primary  election  ofHcers,  405;  in  Mo., 
177.  How  chosen  in  Minn.,  218;  in 
Mich.,  238 ;.in  Nebr.,  188;  in  Wash..  212; 
in  Mo.,  178;  in  111.,  207;  in  Cal.,  200. 

Primary  reform:  Relation  to  ballot  re- 
form, 84,  85;  movement  toward,  83; 
Wigmore  on,  100;  necessity  of  more, 
99;  organizations  for  promotion  of, 
97;  progress  of,  90;  prospects  of,  100. 

Proportional  representation,  and  direct 
primary,  464;  claims  for,  464;  expe- 
diency of,  465;  schemes  of,  69. 

Proxies,  abuse  of,  59. 

Qualification  for  voting.  See  Test; 
also  Closed  Primary. 

Referendum,  agitation  for,  445;  advan- 
tages of,  456;  disadvantages  of,  457; 
in  other  countries,  455;  in  Switzer- 
land, 460;  in  America,  453,  461. 

Reform,  primary ,  45,  86,  466,  469. 

Registration,  in  Cal.,  198,  203;  in  Minn., 
216,  218;  in  Nebr.,  188;  in  Oreg.,  228, 
233;  in  Mich.,  236;  on  primary  day, 
209;  not  on  primary  day,  178. 

Regular  nomination,  13,  17,  44, 

Reinsch,  Paul  S.,  on  civil  service,  430. 

Remsen,  second  choice,  290. 

RepubUcan  party,  in  South,  122. 

San  Francisco,  primaries  in,  193. 

Scranton,  Pa.,  primaries,  285. 

Second  choice,  59,  290,  291. 

Senators,  popular  election  of,  448;  nom- 
ination of,  449;  election  of,  450. 

Signatures,  how  solicited,  401,  231;  in 
Oreg.,  232. 

South,  primaries  in,  121 ;  weak  laws  for, 
124,  130;  experience  with,  129,  388; 
personal  politics,  127;  RepubUcan 
party  in,  122. 

South  Carolina,  primaries  in,  131,  133; 
importance  of,  136;  majority  nomi- 
nation, 135;  test  for  voting,  134. 

South  Dakota,  primaries  in,  181. 

Splitting  of  tickets,  209,  224. 

Spier  v.  Baker,  Cal.  decision,  356. 

State  oflacers,  nomination  of,  222,  392. 


State  politics,  in  cities,  327. 
Stevens  bill,  constitutionality  of,  367; 
in  committee  room,  250;  in  senate, 
252;  perfection  of ,  250,  251;  opposition 
to,  95,  251,  257. 
Stevens,  E.  Ray,  on  Hagemeister  bill, 
253;  work  on  bill,  250;  argument  of, 
369. 

Tammany,  in  Wis.,  257. 

Tennessee,  primaries  in,  160,  161. 

Texas,  primaries  in,  145, 

Tie,  how  determined,  221,  240,  409. 

Terms  of  office,  brevity  of,  441. 

Test,  aboUtion  of,  in  Cal.,  359;  and 
weak  parties,  3.36;  determining  fac- 
tors of,  332;  difficulty  of,  330;  effect 
of,  336;  forms  of,  in  operation,  349; 
form  of,  348.  378;  test  in  Ark.,  190; 
in  Cal.,  197,  198,  203,  358;  in  Rl.,  208; 
in  Ind.,  165;  in  Minn.,  219;  in  Mich., 
under  Colby  bill,  236,  239;  in  Mo.,  177; 
in  Nebr.,  188;  in  Oreg.,  228;  legislature 
may  prescribe,  199;  objection  to,  341; 
practicability  of,  346;  prescribed  by 
party,  343;  validity  of,  m  Cal.,  358; 
who  shall  prescribe,  343,  347.  Consti- 
tutionality of  test,  in  Nebr.,  189;  in 
Ind.,  349;  in  Minn.,  350;  in  N.  Y.,  350, 
370.    See  also  Closed  Primary. 

Utah,  primary  law  of,  190. 

Virginia,  primary  law  of,  136, 

Voting,  manner  of,  in  HI.,  208;  in 
Minn.,  219;  in  Oreg.,  228,  233;  under 
Hennepin  county  law,  220;  under 
Stevens  bill  of  Wis.,  249. 

Washington,  primary  law  of,  211 ;  weak- 
ness of  law,  212. 

Watchers  at  polls,  in  Ky.,  173;  in  Mo., 
177,  179;  under  model  law,  407. 

West  Virginia,  primaries  of,  162. 

Wisconsin:  All-night  session  of  legis- 

•  lature,  251;  Bryant  bill  of,  247;  cau- 
cus laws  of,  241-243;  constitutionality 
of  caucus  laws,  368;  convention,  cor- 
naption  in,  244;  direct  primary  in, 
243;  Hatton  amendment,  253;  Lewis 
bill  of,  245;  primary  reform  in,  95, 
241,  244,  246,  247;  platform,  1900,  248; 
public  press  in,  312;  RepubUcan 
League  of,  257;  Stevens  bUl  of,  249, 
251,  255. 


is 


AA    000  683  558    1 


<iX-S  Lim3> 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


NOV  2  9  1972 
APR  5      1274 

'^OV  2  5  1974 


Form  L9-Series  4939 


